On 1/22/06, John Logsdon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've just hit this problem as well and as I am slumming it on XP at the > moment, I don't have the compilation tools to use the .tar.gz version. > > I also notice that the numbering format has changed. Is this intentional?
Which numbering format? If you mean the use of 0.995 rather than 0.99 it is because I keep finding changes that need to be made in the underlying format for mixed-effects representations (i.e. mer objects) before a 1.0 release. The current sequence of numbers is 0.99 (99%), 0.995 (99 1/2%), 0.9975 (99 3/4%), 0.99875 (99 7/8%), ... It is a pattern like, but not as inventive as, Donald Knuth's numbering sequence for TeX releases. It has the desirable property of allowing for an infinite number of releases before you need to declare the package to be at release 1.0 There will be at least a 0.9975 series of minor releases (I need to add another two slots to the mer object). ______________________________________________ R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
