Hi Artemy, The version number is just a pain to parse.
A build number also happens to be much more "machine" readable, which is the use case here. I'd like to have other core members' opinion on this. And contrary to what I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure if the svn changset number is the way to go as we sometimes backport bug fixes to earlier versions of Prototype. Best, Tobie On Feb 3, 4:39 pm, "artemy tregoubenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Latest Prototype > here:http://prototypejs.org/assets/2008/1/25/prototype-1.6.0.2.js > has following lines at the top: > var Prototype = { > Version: '1.6.0.2', > > Isn't this enough? > > I think using revision number is mostly replacing one readable number with > another unreadable. I believe versions are already mapped to specific > revisions, and using intermediate revisions is a dangerous way to go. > > But if someone really needs this - why not? Except that usually such specific > needs aren't put in the core, afaik. > > > > > I recently wrote a patch for Scriptaculous that allows version > > checking beyond the x.x.x scope. It allows to check for 1.6.0.2 > > instead of just 1.6.0, this will help to inform people when they use > > incompatible version of prototype/scriptaculous. > > >http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10966 > > > Tobie suggested to add the svn changeset number to Prototype. I think > > that is a much better way to go. Adding something like > > Prototype.Revision will help Scriptaculous and other extensions to > > write proper version checks. What do you think, is it something worth > > adding? > > -- > arty (http://arty.name) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
