On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When the final version (1.7.0) is released, this code will work
> fine, do you want to make it more robust for the beta release?
I'd just accept that it doesn't like "beta" as a number and not worry
too much, maybe even disable the tes
Hello Kev,
at first glance it looks OK.
Regards,
Antoine
Kev Jackson wrote:
> Hi Antoine,
>
> As you requested, I've modified AntVersion to pass the failing test with
> the beta, without using positional indexing (brittle) code - please see
> commit for more details. Again if you spot a proble
Hi Antoine,
As you requested, I've modified AntVersion to pass the failing test with
the beta, without using positional indexing (brittle) code - please see
commit for more details. Again if you spot a problem with this please
let me know, I'll try to get it fixed asap.
Thanks,
Kev
---
Hello Kevin,
On Aug 28, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Kev Jackson wrote:
Hi all,
AntVersion test is failing because the current Ant version number is
1.7.0Beta1 - the Beta1 characters are causing the DeweyDecimal code to
fail. It's also extremely difficult to test in isolation as the
version
string is
