RetroSearch Browse

Wed Oct 15 12:50:45 EDT 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038760.html

Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > I would suggest Python-2.3.2-1.exe which more strongly implies the same 
> > version of software but a different version of packaging.
> 
> +1

How about making it "-2", then, as the previous (broken) package would have
been "-1".  Some might assume "Python-2.3.2.exe" and "Python-2.3.2-1.exe" were
identical, but I would think few would make that assumption with
"Python-2.3.2.exe" and "Python-2.3.2-2.exe".

Charles
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon                           <python at discworld.dyndns.org>
GPL'ed software available at:     http://www.qcc.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038760.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python-2.3.2 windows binary screwed