On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:08 PM, M.-A. Lemburg <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's another take at a minimal change to the format which > includes the things we discussed, adds a few more aliases > for the "post" and "dev" markers and also adds optional > underscores for more readability. > > VERSION_RE = re.compile(r''' > ^ > (?P<version>\d+\.\d+) # minimum 'N.N' > (?P<extraversion>(?:\.\d+)*) # any number of extra '.N' segments > (?: # pre-release tag > _? > (?P<prerel>(a|alpha|b|beta|c|rc)) > _? > (?P<prerelversion>\d+(?:\.\d+)*) > )? > (?P<postdev> > (\.(post|fix|sp)_?(?P<post>\d+))? > (\.(dev|pre|build|nightly)_?(?P<dev>\d+))? > )? > $''', re.VERBOSE + re.I) > > Examples: > > 3.2.0a0.20091125 > < 3.2.0a1 > = 3.2.0_alpha_1 > < 3.2.0a1.20091125 > < 3.2.0rc1 > = 3.2.0c1 > < 3.2.0rc1.20091125 > = 3.2.0_rc1.20091125 > < 3.2.0 > < 3.2.0.sp1 > = 3.2.0.fix1 > = 3.2.0.post1 > > One nit I have with the order of the N.N.devN version is that it is regarded > "more" than any of the pre-release tags, but less than the release itself: > > 1.0a1 > < 1.0rc1 > < 1.0.dev456 > < 1.0 > > IMHO, the order should be: > > 1.0.dev456 > < 1.0a1.dev456 > < 1.0a1 > < 1.0rc1.dev456 > < 1.0rc1 > < 1.0 > > since the .dev versions are really only snapshots leading up to > some release, i.e. 1.0.dev456 is a snapshot leading up to the > first pre-release of the 1.0 :-)
That's right, that's a bug in the PEP and/or verlib.py The changes look good to me. If you made some changes in verlib, would you mind pushing them back at http://bitbucket.org/tarek/distutilsversion ? I'll update the PEP then, and if there's no more feedback here, I'll propose it at python-dev Regards Tarek _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
