hi,
No, I mean version with 1.0 and not 1.0.0 are not. They are just not
correct and confusing, as you noticed.
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Andrew Faulds <[email protected]> wrote:
> What? x, x.y, x.y.z, x.y.z.a, etc are all valid.
> 1, 1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.2.3, in that order, would be valid.
>
> On Jul 21, 2012 10:07 AM, "Pierre Joye" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> hi!
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Rasmus Schultz <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Of course that would break backwards compatibility, which kind of
>> > defeats
>> > the purpose of having a standardized version-number comparison standard.
>>
>> x.y.z is standard, x.y not. I keep asking package maintainers to use
>> x.y.z as version and not x.y.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Pierre
>>
>> @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org