On 24 Nov 2011, at 18:14, Bernd wrote:
> Yes, I understand the intention. But this leads to the dilemma that
> now the branch which is by definition always same or more advanced
> than the last release(candidate) from it still has a *lower* version
> number than the already released release candidate itself.
The RC moniker is only part of the long version number (2.6.0-RC1), not of the
short version number (2.6.0). It cannot be made part of the short version
number because e.g. in Pascal code, you can do {$if FPC_FULLVERSION >= 20600}
(">= 20600RC1" does not make sense). It would also require installing the files
for the RCs on unix platforms in lib/fpc/2.6.0-rc1/..., and hence different
interpretation of the $fpcversion compiler macro etc. And having an svn
development branch of which the short version number is 2.6.0 is what would
really have the potential to create lots of confusion.
Jonas_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
