El dom, 10-01-2010 a las 23:34 +0100, Mariano Martinez Peck escribi�:

>
>
>
> � � � � yes I think it is too complicated a version scheme. The dev
> � � � � tag is
> � � � � also synonymous with Pharo.
>
> � � � � so if your Pharo image is currently
> � � � � Pharo1.0-10505-rc1dev10.01.1
> � � � � I would call it Pharo-1.0-10505-rc1. This is the same scheme
> � � � � that the
>
> The is Pharo-1.0-10505-rc1 �or it should be Pharo-1.0-10505rc1 �(note
> the - between 10505 and rc1).
> I ask because the PharoCore 10502 was released as
> PharoCore-1.0-10502rc1.
> I can ask Adrian so that the next PharoCore 1.0 be like:
> Pharo-1.0-10XXX-rc2
>

I vote for having the tokens separated by "-", so:

Pharo-1.0-10505-rc1

Also, the original proposal for the name format is here:

http://n2.nabble.com/Pharo-name-format-tp3365418p3365418.html

Cheers

> I know...it is a little detail.but...jhhahahha
>
>
> � � � � core image uses, and Pharo 1.1 will have this behaviour
> � � � � already using
> � � � � #imageVersionString since it is in 1.1.
>
> � � � � thanks,
> � � � � Mike
>
>
> � � � � _______________________________________________
> � � � � Pharo-project mailing list
> � � � � Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> � � � � http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

--
Miguel Cob�
http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project