<div id="reply-content">
<br>
</div>
<div id="85AE6A900D2245E5A23F1C6DC869F5A9"></div>
<p style="color: #A0A0A8;">Le mercredi 26 décembre 2012 à 17:45, David Golden a écrit :</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;">
<div id="quoted-message-content"><div><div>Basically, Dancer and plugins are doing version numbers and version</div><div>number comparison wrong. Yes, I am an authority on this. ;-)</div></div></div></blockquote><div>We believe you ! :)<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "> </span></div><blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;"><div id="quoted-message-content"><div><div><br></div><div>My suggestion, given the current state of affairs, is that</div><div>dancer_version in the 1.999_XX dev series should be hardcoded to 2 in</div><div>advance of the actual 2.0 release. If you want to be fancy, something</div><div>like this:</div><div><br></div><div> sub dancer_version { Dancer->VERSION lt 2 ? 2 : Dancer->VERSION }</div><div><br></div><div>That decouples the version that plugins see from the module versioning.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That's a good idea. Looking at the current code in Dancer.pm I don't understand the code of the VERSION method anyway :) I think sukria agrees to remove the API version thingy. There is also an API version in App.pm that should be removed. And dancer_api_version should go away imho, as I doesn't exist in dancer 1 DSL. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;"><div id="quoted-message-content"><div><div><br></div><div>David</div><div><br></div><div>On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 5:59 PM, damien krotkine <dkrotkine@gmail.com> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div><br></div><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>As I understand, Alexis did a dev release of dancer2. The version is</div><div>1.9999_01 or something like that.</div><div><br></div><div>People and plugins currently uses int(dancer_version) to discover if it's</div><div>running under Dancer 1 or Dancer 2.</div><div><br></div><div>int(1.0000_01) emits a warnings, so to work around that, a ne keyword has</div><div>been added :</div><div><br></div><div>dancer_major_version, which returns what's on the left of the dot in the</div><div>version number.</div><div><br></div><div>Fine, except that :</div><div>- this keyword has not been added to Dancer v1, so plugins using</div><div>dancer_major_version will break under Dancer 1</div><div>- no advertizing has been made on to what plugins should use (ie continue</div><div>using int() or use the new keyword)</div><div><br></div><div>What's the best solution ?</div><div><br></div><div>In my opinion we can :</div><div>1/ Release a new Dancer 1, and ask people to use dancer_major_version and</div><div>require the latest Dancer 1 release (or Dancer 2) : long and cumbersome as</div><div>we need to potentially modify plugins and contact users and so all</div><div><br></div><div>2/ remove dancer_major_version, and change dancer_version so that it returns</div><div>the version without the _xx at the end. Simple, doesn't need to release D1</div><div>again, and nothing to change in plugins.</div><div><br></div><div>3/ any idea ?</div><div><br></div><div>As you may guess, I'm a big fan of solution 2. If you all agree (especially</div><div>sukria, as he added dancer_major_version, and maybe he had an other reasons</div><div>for that), I can make the change.</div><div><br></div><div>In my opinion, the longer we stay in the current situation</div><div>(dancer_major_version only in D2), the more dangerous it is</div><div><br></div><div>dams.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>_______________________________________________</div><div>dancer-users mailing list</div><div>dancer-users@dancer.pm</div><div>http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>-- </div><div>David Golden <xdg@xdg.me></div><div>Take back your inbox! → http://www.bunchmail.com/</div><div>Twitter/IRC: @xdg</div><div>_______________________________________________</div><div>dancer-users mailing list</div><div>dancer-users@dancer.pm</div><div>http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users</div></div></div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<br>
</div>