Le mercredi 26 décembre 2012 à 17:45, David Golden a écrit :

Basically, Dancer and plugins are doing version numbers and version
number comparison wrong. Yes, I am an authority on this. ;-)
We believe you ! :) 

My suggestion, given the current state of affairs, is that
dancer_version in the 1.999_XX dev series should be hardcoded to 2 in
advance of the actual 2.0 release. If you want to be fancy, something
like this:

sub dancer_version { Dancer->VERSION lt 2 ? 2 : Dancer->VERSION }

That decouples the version that plugins see from the module versioning.

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. 



David

On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 5:59 PM, damien krotkine <dkrotkine@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

As I understand, Alexis did a dev release of dancer2. The version is
1.9999_01 or something like that.

People and plugins currently uses int(dancer_version) to discover if it's
running under Dancer 1 or Dancer 2.

int(1.0000_01) emits a warnings, so to work around that, a ne keyword has
been added :

dancer_major_version, which returns what's on the left of the dot in the
version number.

Fine, except that :
- this keyword has not been added to Dancer v1, so plugins using
dancer_major_version will break under Dancer 1
- no advertizing has been made on to what plugins should use (ie continue
using int() or use the new keyword)

What's the best solution ?

In my opinion we can :
1/ Release a new Dancer 1, and ask people to use dancer_major_version and
require the latest Dancer 1 release (or Dancer 2) : long and cumbersome as
we need to potentially modify plugins and contact users and so all

2/ remove dancer_major_version, and change dancer_version so that it returns
the version without the _xx at the end. Simple, doesn't need to release D1
again, and nothing to change in plugins.

3/ any idea ?

As you may guess, I'm a big fan of solution 2. If you all agree (especially
sukria, as he added dancer_major_version, and maybe he had an other reasons
for that), I can make the change.

In my opinion, the longer we stay in the current situation
(dancer_major_version only in D2), the more dangerous it is

dams.



_______________________________________________
dancer-users mailing list
dancer-users@dancer.pm
http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users



--
David Golden <xdg@xdg.me>
Take back your inbox! → http://www.bunchmail.com/
Twitter/IRC: @xdg
_______________________________________________
dancer-users mailing list
dancer-users@dancer.pm
http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users