Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek <at> gmail.com> writes:
An implicit range operator is simpler indeed, and achieves the same goal.
Meaning that "<=2.5" for example, will be translated to "<=2.5.x" as well.
With respect, it's not a very common use case for a developer to say that package needs a python interpretor 'older' than 2.5.
There comes a point where you can just not expect a python interpretor, say 1.3, to not work with your package. So they wouldn't say that. I don't think.
Nor would they say it going forward. So ">=2.5" might be too bold a claim for them to make. As they might not have tested on the 'latest-and-greatest' interpretor. That would imply that they know it works on all 3 series interpretors.
imho, all that they would know, is that they're using python (for example) 2.4 or 2.5 (pick a python version) and they know it works pretty well.
It's then up to the user if they want to use it on any other version.
That's why I don't think we need the '=' '>=' operator characters to represent typical use cases.
If there's any use-case, that I have missed. Do let me know.