On 12/12/06, Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unfortunately I think the format for 1.1 is the format that we want to keep > going forward. > Just for the purposes of comparison: > > 1.0: IronPython 1.0.60816 on .NET 2.0.50727.42 > 1.0.1: IronPython 1.0 (1.0.61005.1977) on .NET 2.0.50727.42 > 1.1 Alpha: 2.4.0 (IronPython 1.1 Alpha (1.1) on .NET 2.0.50727.42)
> The 1.1 alpha format just changed this morning - previously it didn't have > the string > Alpha in it and had a v before the version number. Hm. Are you only planning a single alpha? Otherwise this format isn't very useful. You might want to change the bit in the brackets to be of the form "1.1a1". For what it's worth, here's a typical CPython pattern: 2.5a1 - 1st alpha 2.5a2 - 2nd alpha 2.5a3 - 3rd alpha 2.5b1 - 1st beta ... 2.5c1 - 1st release candidate ... 2.5 - final release 2.5.1c1 - release candidate for 2.5.1 2.5.1 - final release for 2.5.1 This has been figured out over some time and works well for us. > The good news is that "'IronPython' in sys.version" (or 'IronPython 1.' Or > 'IronPython 1.0') > remains as a compatible way to check across all versions. Sorry for the > changes here > but this should be the final format going forward. I'm trying to make lib/platform.py work - one of the things it needs is to determine the actual version of the Python implementation. IronPython is neither 2.4 nor 2.5, but instead is "1.0", "1.0.1", or "1.1a1" (at the moment). Yes, in theory determining the precise version is bad practice, but there are times when it's necessary. _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
