On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Thomas A. Lowery wrote:
> I've changed my version of DBD::ADO to 2.0, instead of continuing the
> 1.X line. This may help in future releases.
>
> > > Why did the version regress? Let's take a look at the code for
> > > blib/DBD/ADO.pm in DBI 1.15 and 1.14:
>
> Tim and I we're attempting to maintain DBD::ADO is two different CVS
> libraries I believe.
> Now, my question: Is this the standard "version" syntax?
> $VERSION = substr(q$Revision: 2.0 $, 9,-1) +0;
>
> using: perl -MDBD::ADO -e "print $DBD::ADO::VERSION"
> I get 2
>
> Is there a better method?
For what it's worth, I use this (second line wrapped to fit in mail
message):
our ($VER,$VERSION);
($VER) = '$Name: $' =~ /Name:\s+v([\d_]+)/; $VER ||= '1_0'; \
($VERSION = $VER) =~ s/_/./g;
CVS doesn't deal with '.' in release tags, so this brain-damage derives it
on-the-fly ('cvs extract' produces a release and substitutes e.g. 'Name:
1_0' for '$Name$').
Steve
