[Rubygems-developers] Version number format

Jamis Buck jgb3 at email.byu.edu
Mon Mar 29 19:38:30 EST 2004

Richard Kilmer wrote:
> Because we do numeric comparison of versions, having text in it would be 
> rather hard to manage.  Why not just increment the 0.3.0 to 0.3.1 ?
> -rich

That'll be my fallback option, since it works. :)  However, my thought 
was this: there are projects out there (quite a few of them) that 
provide the current "bleeding-edge" versions of their software, fresh 
out of CVS, bundled up and ready to run.  Most people, of course, would 
not want to use these, since they are often buggy and may not even run, 
but if someone wants to see whether a bug they've encountered in the 
stable version has been taken care of in CVS or not, this is a nice option.

Thus, it would be nice to have a "snapshot" version--I could have a 
script run everytime I check something into CVS, which would essentially 
create a gem file for the current state of the sources. I could put this 
up on my site, and the version number would never change, but some other 
indicator would show that it is a snapshot.

Incrementing the version number doesn't really show that--I mean, 0.3.1 
is still a valid release. This is really a way to have a "non-release" 
of your software.

If nothing else, I may arbitrarily say that x.x.0 releases are CVS 
snapshots, and non .0 releases are "real" releases.  It still feels 
kludgy, though.

If I am the only one that sees value in this, then I'll stop yammering. 
I may tinker with the rubygems sources to see if I can come up with an 
elegant way of doing this anyway, though. ;)

Jamis Buck
jgb3 at email.byu.edu

ruby -h | ruby -e 
'a=[];readlines.join.scan(/-(.)\[e|Kk(\S*)|le.l(..)e|#!(\S*)/) {|r| a << 
r.compact.first };puts "\n>#{a.join(%q/ /)}<\n\n"'

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list