Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi Philipp,
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Hello Stefan,
Thursday, May 18, 2006, 4:55:04 AM, you wrote:
I also thought about that. We could release a 0.9.9 right away, so that people can give us feedback more easily, without having to run Pyrex and the like. However, I would then prefer having a single pre-release only before 1.0. Martijn, any objections to that? Steve, Olivier, Georges - could you please be ready to provide eggs for the beta release, so that we don't loose too much time before the release in June? Sure, when should we build them ? Is the current trunk the beta release ? I would advise making a tag. I would also advise NOT to call it 0.9.9 as
Steve Howe wrote: this suggests some offspring from the 0.9.x line. Just call it 1.0beta, this is a very common naming scheme, even in Python :)
Normally, yes. The thing is that lxml currently uses a "numbers-only" versioning scheme and I'd prefer keeping it that way, especially since the version will be accessible as int tuple in 1.0.
So, "1.0.beta" will not work that well, as it will become something like (1,0,"beta",0)
print (1,0,"beta",0) < (1,0,0,0) False
is not quite the expected result.
setuptools gets this right, though.
As a work-around, you could make it (1,0,-1,0) and special case the version string parser to represent "beta" as -1. I think that's a good idea. Any objections?
No idea why you need this number comparison. As said, setuptools gets this right anyways. Philipp