On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:29 AM, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > No. Look, I didn't change anything. It has grown that way and > > > I know it's fscking broken. > > > > Ahh, alright, I guess I was wrong. I thought it used to show the > > version numbers. Sorry. > > No problem. It really is like this, and IIRC several people > have complained about it already. Hysterical raisins, again, > are to be blamed.
Those damn raisins are at it again! I'll volunteer to help here. For tagged eggs, the version number is the name of the most recently-added tag (correct)? For untagged eggs, the setup file will include a version number; if it does not, we can assume a version of 0.0.0. I'll keep a local, updated copy of the release/3 repository, analyze the eggs for their version numbers, and put a CGI script somewhere that will return a sexpr of the eggs and their version numbers. We can add release/X support later if this works for release/3. Would this help? Graham _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
