Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-5-31 22:04 +0200:
> ...
> How about
>
> foo 2.>=5
This seems really weird to me.
I much prefer: "foo 2, >=2.5"
>>>
>>> Would you be able to write
>>>
>>> foo 2.4, >=2.4.3
>>
>> Yup.
>
>Hmm, ok, then I'm at least not against
On Jun 1, 2007, at 7:04 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Any release tagged as "alpha", "beta", "rc", "pre", or with an
SVN revision.
I agree with Tres' goal. I think setuptools refers to those as
"pre-release tags". And I think anything that has a pre-release tag
should be consid
Jim Fulton wrote:
Any release tagged as "alpha", "beta", "rc", "pre", or with an SVN
revision.
I agree with Tres' goal. I think setuptools refers to those as
"pre-release tags". And I think anything that has a pre-release tag
should be considered unstable.
SVN revisions are provided as post
Tres Seaver wrote:
Another feature I'm not sure is already in setuptools:
- I *don't* want dev releases to replace production ones
implicitly: no package should be able to install a non-released
version without explicit callout. If this isn't already the
default behavior, then I'
On 31 May 2007, at 22:00 , Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 31, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
On 31 May 2007, at 21:50 , Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 31, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages
On May 31, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
On 31 May 2007, at 21:50 , Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 31, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages
don't change very much after they have beco
On 31 May 2007, at 21:50 , Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 31, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages don't
change very much after they have become stable, I think most
package dependencies could be expressed
On May 31, 2007, at 3:40 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages don't
change very much after they have become stable, I think most
package dependencies could be expressed very simpl
On May 31, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages don't
change very much after they have become stable, I think most
package dependencies could be expressed very simply if there was a
simple syntax t
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages don't
change very much after they have become stable, I think most package
dependencies could be expressed very simply if there was a simple
syntax to specify *just* the major version
Jim Fulton wrote:
Combined with the fact that that great majority of packages don't change
very much after they have become stable, I think most package
dependencies could be expressed very simply if there was a simple syntax
to specify *just* the major version. In the context of setuptools, I
Am Donnerstag, den 31.05.2007, 11:28 -0400 schrieb Jim Fulton:
> On May 31, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, den 31.05.2007, 11:14 -0400 schrieb Tres Seaver:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> Jim Fulton wrote:
> >>> What do you mean by
On May 31, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 31.05.2007, 11:14 -0400 schrieb Tres Seaver:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
What do you mean by a "dev" release?
Any release tagged as "alpha", "beta", "rc", "pre", or with an SVN
re
On May 31, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 31, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
I'd rather have the dot, e.g. "foo 2.* >= 2.5", just for clarity:
- It makes the intent clearer (that you want any version in t
Am Donnerstag, den 31.05.2007, 11:14 -0400 schrieb Tres Seaver:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jim Fulton wrote:
> > What do you mean by a "dev" release?
>
> Any release tagged as "alpha", "beta", "rc", "pre", or with an SVN revision.
I agree with Tres' goal. I think setup
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On May 31, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> I'd rather have the dot, e.g. "foo 2.* >= 2.5", just for clarity:
>>
>> - It makes the intent clearer (that you want any version in the
>> "two dot" release line).
>>
>> -
On May 31, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
I'd rather have the dot, e.g. "foo 2.* >= 2.5", just for clarity:
- It makes the intent clearer (that you want any version in the
"two dot" release line).
- It disambiguates the case where the version number might have
double digits
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
> In thinking about how we might specify that we want to depend on
> major versions but sometimes need to specify minimum versions, the
> following occurred to me:
>
> - Suppose that we always had access to the latest released ve
18 matches
Mail list logo
