[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/11/10]
Luke Kanies wrote: > I currently spend all my time in Ruby, but I fortunately don't have to > deal much with RubyGems. I say fortunately, because, like all software, > it's hate-worthy. I personally think it's a bit more hate-worthy than > it should be, and here's an example. > > Some people run released versions of my software. Some people use the > software directly from Subversion. It's important to know which they're > using when they're filing bugs, so I want some way to differentiate > them. So, reasonably, I add 'svn' on to my version number. > > *I* don't mind. Ruby doesn't mind. But oh now, RubyGems declares that > I cannot have a version number that looks like that: > > Malformed version number string 0.20.0-svn Not to diminish your hate, but that's a pretty poor version number. For a start, You need special knowledge to compare it against other version numbers. Why not have a version number and a build number? Use the repo revision number as the build number, make it accessible, and have your users report the build number when they report bugs. N
Generated at 23:01 on 18 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52