[Rd] Version names

[Gabor Grothendieck]

Peter Dalgaard <p.dalgaard <at> biostat.ku.dk> writes:

: 
: Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck <at> myway.com> writes:
: 
: > : >	rw2010a - alpha, i.e. development version (previously rw2010dev)
: > : >	rw2010b - beta version (previously rw2001beta)
: > : >	rw2010f - final version (previously rw2010)
: > : >	rw2010p - patched version (previously rw2010pat)
: > : 
: > : That would work.  Use the rename command, and you've got it.
: > : 
: > 
: > Renaming is not really workable if you are giving your scripts to others.
: > They won't want build scripts that rename their folders.  
: ......
: > Its really desirable to keep Windows batch scripts as simple as 
: > possible and such a transformation is trickier than you might
: > think in the Windows batch language. 
: > 
: > I was hoping that the R team would consider a simplifying
: > change to make it easier to create build scripts.  The least such 
: > change that I can think of is to use alpha as a suffix in place of dev 
: > and to use final to suffix unsuffixed versions.  That would be enough to 
: > allow them to sort in ascending order.
: > 
: > This involves no coding at all for the R team.  Just a decision
: > to regularize the naming.
: 
: In a word, no, we won't do that. I'd certainly veto it if it came to
: that. 
: 
: It is a bad idea to have scripts depending on sort order (and R core
: has learned the hard way that sort order depends on locale), and it is
: an even worse idea to modify development concepts to fit a specificic
: alphabetical order. Case in point: A development version is _not_ the
: same as an alpha version!

I am pretty sure one could come up with a naming scheme that would
work in every locale.  If we used a, b, f and p then I doubt there
are any locales in which those are not increasing.  If that's not
true we could use numbers.  I really doubt that there are locales
in which digits are mot increasing.



: