Hi Seth,

yes, now I understood the way the packages are bumped and numbered. The
package I'm submiting is not yet in the BioC repository, its name is
maigesPack.

Many thanks.

Gustavo


On 9/10/07, Seth Falcon <sfalcon@fhcrc.org> wrote:
>
> "Gustavo H. Esteves" <gesteves@uepb.edu.br> writes:
>
> > Hello Seth,
> >
> > I'm contributing a new package now (it is under revision), and the
> current
> > version number is 1.0.2. Your message means that I'll need to
> re-numerate
> > the package version for 1.1.0 or 0.99.0, right? If I not change the
> version
> > number, it will not enter the next BioC release?
>
> Moving version numbers backwards is almost always a bad idea so I
> would recommend against 0.99.0 unless the package has not yet been
> pushed to the BioC web repository (you didn't mention your package
> name).
>
> If a package is at 1.0.2, I believe our scripts will bump the package
> to 1.2.0 for the release and 1.3.0 for the next devel cycle.  So
> changing to 1.1.0 is not absolutely required.
>
> Does that help?
>
> + seth
>
> --
> Seth Falcon | Computational Biology | Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research
> Center
> BioC: http://bioconductor.org/
> Blog: http://userprimary.net/user/
>



-- 
*********************************************************

     "The truth you speak has no past and no
       future. It is, and that's all it needs to be."

     "A verdade que você fala não tem passado
      nem futuro. Ela é,  e isso é tudo que ela
      precisa ser."

                         Richard Bach

*********************************************************


   Gustavo Henrique Esteves

   Departamento de Matemática e Estatística,
   Centro de Ciências e Tecnologia,
   Universidade Estadual da Paraíba.

   e-mail: gesteves@uepb.edu.br

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

