On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 00:25 -0700, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Hi Ian,
[snip
> Nothing can really keep you save from such incompatibilities and problems
> anyway. You silently imply that a higher version is always compatible, but
> that's also not true (you know). In really worse cases it is like the
>
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 23:38 -0700, Barrie Treloar wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Ian Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would propose that the semantics change to "Of the overlapping ranges,
> > the *lowest* soft requirement is the version to be used
If I understand the web page correctly, if Mercury sees a dependency of 1.23,
it will interpret that to mean "any version 1.23 or or greater". What I'm
unable to discern from the links below is which version will actually be chosen
when the versions available are, say, 1.23 and 1.24. Is there
duce
instability might increase adoption of the syntax.
If there are objections to this, I would be interested in knowing what they
are. If there are not objections, I would be quite willing to provide a patch
of the code and unit tests.
- Ian Robertson
CONFI
