[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Integrating package.el
From: |
Štěpán Němec |
Subject: |
Re: Integrating package.el |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Mar 2010 23:30:31 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-27) |
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 11:18:32PM +0100, Štěpán Němec wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:37:43PM +0100, Jonas Bernoulli wrote:
> > Speaking of version strings, are there any conventions how an author
> > should version his packages? Currently when I make edits after a
> > release and make them public while not wanting to release yet another
> > version I usually just add a "+" after the version.
> >
> > 0.1 -> 0.1+ -> .... -> 0.1+ -> 0.2
>
> [just a thought:]
> Maybe using something compatible with what `version-to-list' and friends
> can understand?
... which is actually the case even with the above:
(version-to-list "0.1+")
=> (0 1 -3)
so it's treated like an alpha release by default.
- Re: Integrating package.el, (continued)
- Re: Integrating package.el, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/01
- Re: Integrating package.el, Jonas Bernoulli, 2010/03/01
- Re: Integrating package.el, Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/02
- Re: Integrating package.el, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/03
- Re: Integrating package.el, Phil Hagelberg, 2010/03/04
- Re: Integrating package.el, Davis Herring, 2010/03/02
Re: Integrating package.el, Phil Hagelberg, 2010/03/04
Re: Integrating package.el, Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/04