Isn't the pep carefully constructed to respect lexicographical sorting? On Sep 12, 2012 1:44 PM, "Erik Bray" wrote:

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:

...

Why does 1.0a1 sort before 1.0.dev1? It appears to me that common usage in the wild of dev1 releases is that they are used for the development version before any sort of alpha, beta, rc, or final has been cut?

If I had to guess, the rationale might be that when developing a new version you're developing toward the first "alpha" release, so something like .dev1 would be a development preview of a final release after all a/b/rc pre-releases have been released.

That said, this doesn't match my workflow at all. After releasing "1.0" the next version is going to be "1.1", and any development pre-release will be "1.1.devX". "1.1a" might not ever even exist. I think others brought up this critique at the time PEP 386 was being discussed, but then nothing was ever done about it >_>

Erik _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Erik Bray wrote:

That said, this doesn't match my workflow at all. After releasing "1.0" the next version is going to be "1.1", and any development pre-release will be "1.1.devX". "1.1a" might not ever even exist. I think others brought up this critique at the time PEP 386 was being discussed, but then nothing was ever done about it >_>

Yea, this concerned me because 1.1.devX < 1.1a1 < 1.1b1 < 1.1c1 < 1.1 is how i've seen it used in the wild. Looks like most everyone i've seen using it so far has been doing it wrong. Don't think ive seen a single person do it right.