On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Marcus Smith <qwc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> a top level "dev" release should be sorted before the first alpha >> release > > > ok, so applying this to the example in pep386 (and your comment about > interpreting a top-level "dev" as "a0.dev"), the sorting would be like this? > > new ... V('1.0dev1') > new ... < V('1.0a0.dev2') > new ... < V('1.0dev3') > 313 ... < V('1.0a1') > 314 ... < V('1.0a2.dev456') > 315 ... < V('1.0a2') > 316 ... < V('1.0a2.1.dev456') > 317 ... < V('1.0a2.1') > 318 ... < V('1.0b1.dev456') > 319 ... < V('1.0b2') > 320 ... < V('1.0b2.post345') > 321 ... < V('1.0c1.dev456') > 322 ... < V('1.0c1') > 323 ... < V('1.0.dev456') > 324 ... < V('1.0') > 325 ... < V('1.0.post456.dev34') > 326 ... < V('1.0.post456')) > 327 True
No, all the "dev" releases will sort before all the "a" releases (and PEP 426 will be explicit about that). The "dev-implies-a0" interpretation is only accurate if there's no explicit "a0" release (and was mostly just a matter of me thinking out loud, anyway). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig