FAQ
23. Have a "development version" flag

Proposal:

Add a boolean value indicating whether the release is a "production" or
"alpha/developer/beta/whatever" release. [[User:elliot|Elliot Shank]]

Comments:

* Pro: We'd have an unambiguous way of specifying that something is or is
not "production ready", without any silly parsing of version numbers that
include or don't include underscores.

* Con: I can't see the current system for determining this being
deprecated, so we'd have two systems to support. [[User:elliot|Elliot
Shank]]

* Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-installation
AdamKennedy

Search Discussions

  • Ricardo Signes at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:17 pm
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:52:45]
    23. Have a "development version" flag Agreed.
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-installation
    AdamKennedy
    Packlist 2.0?

    --
    rjbs
  • Graham Barr at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:

    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:52:45]
    23. Have a "development version" flag Agreed.
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-
    installation
    AdamKennedy
    Packlist 2.0?
    Agreed.

    The main use of development status seems to be control if the
    distribution is indexed as the latest released etc. So having a flag
    instead of the hackish way we use _ seems a benefit.

    Graham.
  • David E. Wheeler at Oct 9, 2009 at 6:58 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 7:20 AM, Graham Barr wrote:

    Packlist 2.0?
    Agreed.

    The main use of development status seems to be control if the
    distribution is indexed as the latest released etc. So having a flag
    instead of the hackish way we use _ seems a benefit.
    +1

    David
  • Damyan Ivanov at Oct 14, 2009 at 4:38 am
    -=| Graham Barr, Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 09:20:37AM -0500 |=-
    On Oct 9, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:

    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:52:45]
    23. Have a "development version" flag Agreed.
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-
    installation
    AdamKennedy
    Packlist 2.0?
    Agreed.

    The main use of development status seems to be control if the
    distribution is indexed as the latest released etc. So having a flag
    instead of the hackish way we use _ seems a benefit.
    +1

    Getting rid of _ will simplify downstream handling of versions.
    Currently one has to dig into CHANGES in order to determine if
    1.002_04 is a dev release after 1.002 or the fourth beta before 1.002.

    Not that I am all for packaging development releases downstream, but
    some times they fix bugs and are a necessary evil.

    --
    dam
  • Steffen Mueller at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    23. Have a "development version" flag
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-installation
    AdamKennedy
    -1 for this reason. Reinventing packlists and EU::Install* while
    retaining backward compatibility seems like a big can of worms that may
    grind this effort to a halt.

    Steffen
  • Steffen Mueller at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    23. Have a "development version" flag
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable post-installation
    AdamKennedy
    Correction to my earlier reply: If we have the META info available
    *easily* post installation (cf. 33), my vote becomes a +1.

    Steffen
  • David Golden at Oct 9, 2009 at 7:57 pm

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Steffen Mueller wrote:
    David Golden wrote:
    23. Have a "development version" flag
    * Con: Development version'ness would not be determinable
    post-installation
    AdamKennedy
    Correction to my earlier reply: If we have the META info available *easily*
    post installation (cf. 33), my vote becomes a +1.
    That's the idea, which is why I'm in favor.

    Compared to a release_status field, this would be purely binary and
    thus not subject to people inventing new status categories.

    -- David

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-workers @
categoriesperl
postedOct 9, '09 at 11:53a
activeOct 14, '09 at 4:38a
posts8
users6
websitecpan.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase