On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 06:51:46AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:46:39 +0200 > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:33:41 -0700 > > > Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Lay out how .006/.6 would work properly *per* eapi. As I clarified > > >> in my last email, the master would vary dependant on the eapi- > > >> which isn't valid unless you're retroactively overriding the > > >> versioning rules of an eapi. > > > > > > "Must be a superset" being wrong does not mean "entirely arbitrary > > > changes are OK" is right. > > > > You have actual usecases (eventually not thin air), which is your > > counterproposal that works for them? > > Care to rephrase that in English? I'm not proposing anything, so I'm at > a loss as to what you're going on about here.
Being that you can't understand the problem you're commenting on, I'll explain it for you. While you can remove _p1, or _<random_suffix> you cannot change the ordering of an existing version component. Simple example you should grok, changing of 1_p1 such that it's <1.0 is not valid. As I've indicated repeatedly in this thread, and y'all have missed, you cannot change the semantics of the ordering. Sure, you could remove a version component from usage- that said, you cannot change it's ordering. Further, you cannot change the ordering of an existing version- if you can't understand why shifting 0.006 to equivalent to 0.6, then frankly, this discussion need not continue. Cheers. ~harring
pgpklKPIXKZ71.pgp
Description: PGP signature
