On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> On 04/01/13 13:57, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>>> I've attached my tentative implementation for a portable installation hook;
>>> any comments before I publish it?
>> I'm confused by the version numbers in the file names. Should it be
>> 1.0.18 instead of 1.0.13?
> IMO, no. That would imply that it requires MSYS-1.0.18, which it
> doesn't; (I've been using it with earlier versions, for a couple of
> years now, in my workplace, but just never got around to publishing,
> before now).
> All of its dependencies are designated as MSYS-1.0.13 vintage. It may
> well work with even earlier versions, but I'm not confident in saying
> that it will; I AM confident that it will work, as intended, with all
> versions from MSYS-1.0.13 onward. The chosen package name reflects this.
As long as the release notes state that so the documentation can be
ignored by the users I accept this concept.