From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bastien <bastien.guerry@wikimedia.fr>
Subject: Re: [CONCERN] Orgmode version string
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:06:56 +0200
Message-ID: <8762wm5s3j.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <8162wmze0s.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33837 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PBT8N-0005uV-SU
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:07:16 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@googlemail.com>) id 1PBT8L-0005nq-HU
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:07:15 -0400
Received: from mail-ey0-f169.google.com ([209.85.215.169]:47953)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@googlemail.com>) id 1PBT8L-0005nX-9v
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:07:13 -0400
Received: by eydd26 with SMTP id d26so1111300eyd.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 07:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8162wmze0s.fsf@gmail.com> (Jambunathan K.'s message of "Thu, 28
	Oct 2010 18:10:35 +0530")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:

> I have every reason to believe that upcoming version of Org would be
> tagged as 7.02. Earlier I had argued that version strings be
> version-to-list compatible. I would like to reiterate it.
>
> My real concern is that 7.02 would be deemed as equivalent to 7.2
> internally by the versioning subsystem and this is likely to clash with
> user's point of view. A user would *definitely* assume 7.02 as different
> from 7.2 and in all probability swear that former is inferior to the
> later.
>
> Please confirm what I am saying by evalling this:
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (version-list-= (version-to-list "7.02") (version-to-list "7.2"))
> #+end_src

I confirm.

> Ignore this mail if it is already taken care of. Needless to say, I have
> ELPA-tarballs in mind when I say this.

Another way is to make Emacs more liberal about version names.

Can you suggest a new default for `version-regexp-alist' so that
7.01 is considered older than 7.10?

(version-list-= (version-to-list "7.02") (version-to-list "7.2"))
being t is not intuitive.

-- 
 Bastien