Re: Re: Speaking about debian-perl to conferences
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster
<jeremiah.foster@ericsson.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:48:44 +0100, Jeremiah C. Foster wrote:
>
> > you could mention the need for sane version numbers :)
>
> heh. What exactly do you mean though? Do you mean that some CPAN modules have version
> numbers in the form of 1.2.3 and some have the form of 1.0? I think the fact that
> they vary so widely is not so sane. A selection:
>
> (0.2200-3) libdbd-csv-perl
> (0.16001-1) libdatetime-format-pg-perl
> (0.99.4-4) libio-prompt-perl
> (0.2808.01-1) libmodule-build-perl
> (0.06.1b-5) libpdf-create-perl
>
> Do you think that perhaps the PAUSE server might have a gentle advisory that a version number
> in the form of major.minor (i.e. 1.0) might be useful for those downstream as well as useful
> for users to estimate the relative maturity of the code? Or is this one of those things that
> would be great if we could do it but we can never get everyone to do it?
Hi,
after seeing this message I asked on the module-authors list what
people think about enforcing
a stricter format of version numbering on some level. We'll have to
see what is going to be the
responses - if any.
I checked the specific modules mentioned:
> (0.2200-3) libdbd-csv-perl Is actually 0.22 on CPAN, where is the additional 00 from?
> (0.16001-1) libdatetime-format-pg-perl 0.16001
> (0.99.4-4) libio-prompt-perl v0.99.4
> (0.2808.01-1) libmodule-build-perl 0.2808
Where was the additional 01 taken
from ? Was that the 0.2808_01 release?
> (0.06.1b-5) libpdf-create-perl Currently 0.08 on CPAN
In any case there is already a CPANTS kwalitee metric for proper version number
http://cpants.perl.org/kwalitee.html but all the mentioned modules
passed the test.
So maybe the has_proper_version on CPANTS should be stricter.
Gabor
Reply to: