Doru, I guess because I don't agree that the following statement would be true: there will never be a regular version named 'stable' I know that in git I can have a branch named 'stable' and a tag named 'stable' and that causes problems ... for me. Besides, the set of symbolic versions is not restricted to #stable and #development ... one could choose to define a symbolic version called #default or #'1.0'... I intend for there to be two namespaces the linear version namespace and the symbolic version namespace to make a clear distinction between the two, because they have different semantics. One shouldn't be surprised that when version #stable of project foo is loaded the current version of the project is '1.0' on one day and '1.1' on the next. Or when they load #'1.0' that the current version is '1.0-beta.19'. This distinction is obviously not important to you and I am okay with that:) Dale ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Tudor Girba" <tudor@tudorgirba.com> | To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr | Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 10:50:37 AM | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Metacello Why symbolicversion and not simply tagged version:? | | The question is the same I asked when you introduced them :): | Why are symbolic versions treated differently from normal ones? | | This has two dimensions: | - why have a different pragma at all? | - why have the distinction between symbols and versions, given that | there will never be a regular version named 'stable'? | | Cheers, | Doru | | | On 21 Nov 2012, at 19:27, Dale Henrichs <dhenrich@vmware.com> wrote: | | > Stef, | > | > I'm not sure which context you are talking about ... the symbolic | > version #stable can be used as an argument anywhere that the | > linear version '1.1' can be used, so I think that it is true that | > symbolic versions can be used in a #version: message ... | > | > So I guess I need a little more context ... | > | > Dale | > | > ----- Original Message ----- | > | From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> | > | To: "Pharo Development" <Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr> | > | Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 2:19:02 PM | > | Subject: [Pharo-project] Metacello Why symbolicversion and not | > | simply tagged version:? | > | | > | Dale | > | | > | in my goal to reduce the complexity of metacello, I'm wondering | > | why | > | symbolic versions could not be expressed as version: | > | | > | because | > | | > | version: #stable | > | version: #development | > | | > | are symbolic versions and there is no clash possible with | > | | > | version: '1.1' | > | | > | Stef | > | | > | | > | | -- | www.tudorgirba.com | | "Things happen when they happen, | not when you talk about them happening." | | |