Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

lachoy (1663)

lachoy
  chris.winters@gmail.com
http://www.cwinters.com/

I am actually Chris Winters; I am actually living in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; I am actually married and have three cats. (Guess what one of them is named?) I am the "OpenInteract" guy, which could be good or bad.

Journal of lachoy (1663)

Thursday August 29, 2002
07:42 AM

More new versions

[ #7392 ]
Merlyn pointed out, again, that the version numbering for modules in SPOPS were retrograding with version increases. The problem was that I used a crappy CVS Revision formatter which treated '2.7' as '2.70' rather than '2.07'. Thanks to the CPAN testers, I also found that one of my tests failed on 5.8 because I was (one step removed) relying on hash key order. So 0.67 and 0.68 went out in short order, just after releasing 0.66 earlier this week. Doh!
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Take heed of this line from perldoc perlmod:
    $VERSION = do { my @r = (q$Revision: 2.21 $ =~ /\d+/g); sprintf "%d."."%02d" x $#r, @r }; # must be all one line, for MakeMaker
    You still gotta roll a major revision at least once each 100 minor revisions though. {grin}
    --
    • Randal L. Schwartz
    • Stonehenge
    • Bleargh. I like to keep the VERSION numbers to myself, and specify the module version number as a whole entity in the Makefile.PL.

      -Dom

      • If you don't mind a lot of manual work where automation can help, go right ahead.

        Me, I've got better things to do with my time.

        --
        • Randal L. Schwartz
        • Stonehenge
        • It's not so much that, it's the idea that CVS/RCS revision id's aren't necessarily the best things to use as the version for your module (perhaps distribution would be a better term than module) as a whole anyway. I'd rather bump the version number when I want to, not when I correct a typo in the POD.

          I've got a full on woody for automation everywhere else. :-)

          -Dom