Actually, I don't tag my dependencies like that either, I use Git submodules, so I know exactly, byte-for-byte what code I'm distributing.
This doesn't eliminate the need for upgrading packages from time to time. I need to be able to run an "git node update" command and have 20 packages update, without having to manually sift through every one and test if it upgrades well or not. On Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:42:22 PM UTC-7, Michael Schoonmaker wrote: > > Personally, I avoid "~a" or even "~a.b.c" wherever possible. If my > architecture is working with [email protected], then I want it to continue > working with [email protected] until I explicitly attempt an upgrade to version > "a.b.x", "a.x.y", etc. > > You're complaining about shifting package versions breaking your > application, but *you're the one who told npm to shift versions at will*. > > That said, you have control at the per-dependency level. Certain projects > and packages use the npm-enforced "semver" numbers in different ways, and > once you understand how Dependency X treats "minor" version changes, you > can be looser with approximately-versioned dependencies. > > Is that so crazy? > > Schoon > > P.S. This assumes another practice all package authors should follow: > upping your version number every time you publish. The only reason not to > do this should be a Damn Good Reason(tm). > -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
