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
