RE: [Mason-devel] Re: ANNOUNCE: Mason 1.12

[Ian Robertson]

If you ax version numbers now, what happens if someone who already has
a versioned copy of ApacheHandler installed asks CPAN to upgrade it?
Will it conclude that it already has the most up to date version?  For
that matter, if another CPAN module simply lists H::M::AH as a
dependency (as opposed to H::M), which version of Html-Mason will CPAN
grab?  My guess would be the one with the highest (defined) version of
Apache::Handler.

- Ian


 JS == Jonathan Swartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  I think we should just get rid of the version number in
  ApacheHandler.  I hate it when there's more than one version
  number per distribution.
  
  -Ken

 JS I'd be up for that too. Why *do* we have version numbers in all the
 JS individual modules?


 JS ---
 JS This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
 JS Welcome to geek heaven.
 JS http://thinkgeek.com/sf
 JS ___
 JS Mason-devel mailing list
 JS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 JS https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-devel

RE: [Mason-devel] Re: ANNOUNCE: Mason 1.12

[Jonathan Swartz]

  DR == Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 DR See, that's the problem.  We're up in the hundreds.  Maybe we
 should've
 DR started formatting these with '%04d' way back when but that certainly
 DR wouldn't help now.

 How 'bout removing Mason 1.05 from CPAN?  Or are there too many apps
 that require that specific version?

 I know RT had to be updated to work with the latest releases, so for a
 while it required 1.05.

That won't be an option for a long while. There are a number of features
that have not yet been ported to 1.1x.