Yeah, that would definitely be a bug.
On Jul 21, 2012 7:23 AM, "Kris Craig" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 1.01 eq 1.1
>
> Could you explain this one to me? In every versioning system I've ever
> used, 1.1 would be greater than 1.01, not equal.
>
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Stas Malyshev <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > >> For example, I was not the only one who found it odd that "1.0" is
> > > >> considered less than "1.0.0" - wouldn't it make sense to
> > > >> "pad" the
> > > shortest
> > > >> version-number with zeroes? e.g. "1.0" if compared against
> > > >> "1.0.0"
> > > would be
> > > >> padded with zeroes at the end, e.g. as "1.0.0".
> > >
> > > 1.0.0 and 1.0 are different things. If you want to make a comparison
> > > that takes into account only two components, you can just cut them both
> > > to two components, then compare.
> > > --
> > > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
> > > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
> > > (408)454-6900 ext. 227
> > >
>