[Mongrel] The Debian Plan - reloaded

Kirk Haines wyhaines at gmail.com
Mon Jan 15 15:39:31 EST 2007


On 1/15/07, Chad Woolley <thewoolleyman at gmail.com> wrote:

> You are probably right.  However, the RubyGems "Rational Versioning
> Policy" ( http://rubygems.org/read/chapter/7 ) doesn't seem to account
> for the beta/release candidate phase of the development cycle for a
> post-1.0 release.  It looks like the best you can do is to assume that
> any x.0.0 release is a release candidate, and should be treated as
> such.  However, there's still no standard way for a gem developer to
> indicate that a given post-x.0.0 version is now REALLY finished, and
> should be safe for widespread use.

Nope, and I doubt that there ever will be.  Everybody does versioning
differently, so all a person can ever really do is look at the project
information and then judge the version number in the context of the
other project information.

And given that, the gems versioning support is a compromise position
that provides some flexibility in choosing how to assign version
numbers while still providing a useful capability to select specific
versions or ranges of versions.  I'd welcome even more capability in
that regard, personally, but it's hardly a show stopper.

After all, is a version like 1.0-rc9 really any more informative than 0.3.13.4?


Kirk Haines


More information about the Mongrel-users mailing list