I am close to accepting the latest draft of PEP 426 as v1.3 of the
package metadata standard.
However, while I agree the current requirement that version numbers
*must* be in PEP 386 format needs to be relaxed, I don't think the
text as written quite achieves that.
1. The Version field
On 1/28/13 7:17 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
...
3. There needs to be a mechanism to inform automated tools of the
*right* version ordering to use, with PEP 386 being the default.
what happens when you compare two versions from two different schemes ?
Cheers
Tarek
--
Tarek Ziadé ·
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Tarek Ziadé ta...@ziade.org wrote:
On 1/28/13 7:17 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
...
3. There needs to be a mechanism to inform automated tools of the
*right* version ordering to use, with PEP 386 being the default.
what happens when you compare two versions
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Tarek Ziadé ta...@ziade.org wrote:
On 1/28/13 7:17 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
...
3. There needs to be a mechanism to inform automated tools of the
*right* version ordering to use, with
