[OLPC library] [sugar] Physics -- Newtonian mechanics.. for kids!

[Brian Jordan]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Eben Eliason <eben.eliason at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's true, however I think it's also been agreed that we need
> support for, at a minimum, major and minor version numbers for
> activities.  We should probably make some final decisions on that and
> make sure that any software that depends on integers is prepared to
> consider anything of version X without a minor version specified to be
> X.0 for forward compatibility.

Ping -- where can I find more information on activity numbering?

I chose 0.1-1.0-x.x style numbering because it reflects 1.0 being when
I believe the activity is ready for deployment. I hope this intended
meaning is preserved in any suggested version numbering standards.

Things that might be nice to also include on any activity numbering scheme:
- 1.0 is special - when to hold the release party
- testedness / ready-for-classroom?
- major / minor changes

Brian

>
> - Eben
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Michael Stone <michael at laptop.org> wrote:
>> Please remember that activity version numbers must be integers. Software
>> does exist which relies on this assumption!
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar mailing list
>> Sugar at lists.laptop.org
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
>>
>