Revision control software usually seem to use the second dot to mean a branch. 1.1 then 1.2 etc is normal but 1.1.2 is the second revision of a branch off 1.1 . I see this in SCCS, RCS and iirc mercurial does the same ( though with mercurial and git the version numbers apply to a set of files as a version). So your normal Perl module should have only the one dot. Some might need branches, I could see that for e.g. database drivers needing to maintain different functionality for different database releases. Or if you have a module that forked to a development and stable and maintenance branch esp if you add code that requires e.g. Perl 5.16. So you fork to allow bug fixes in the old 5.8 code.
On Jun 1, 2015 9:11 AM, David Cantrell <da...@cantrell.org.uk> wrote: > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 04:30:05PM -0400, Chris Marshall wrote: > > > The biggest issue I've seen with float version strings and triple-dot > > versions is with support for older perls. > > IME a bigger problem is that it makes it far harder than it should be to > write code that reads code. I'm still not convinced that I've got it > 100% correct. > > And given that there is no standard way of assigning meaning to the > various levels of dottiness, using version strings with multiple dots in > is pointless. If there were any benefit at all from using them I might > be more inclined to respect them, but there are no benefits, therefore > their use is a bug, as is the existence of version.pm. Unfortunately > it's a bug that we have to keep for compatibility with a vast amount of > code out there, but please, don't make the situation any worse by > writing code containing the bug. > > -- > David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david > > Your call is important to me. To see if it's important to > you I'm going to make you wait on hold for five minutes. > All calls are recorded for blackmail and amusement purposes.
