[PATCH 0 of 6] Improve requirement error message

[Martin Geisler]

Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> writes:

> On 2011-06-20 10:40, Martin Geisler wrote:
>> Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Why would anyone not just upgrade to the currently released latest
>>> version, which has all features (and bugfixes) by definition?
>> 
>> Mostly because extensions might not work with the latest release. My
>> client with the snap extension still use Mercurial 1.7.3 or so and I
>> know of two other big organizations that use 1.7.x.
>
> And these organizations are perfect examples for users who don't need
> hints to upgrade to "version x.y".
>
> They have their own specific policies what users are supposed to install.

Ah, good point.

>>> And I'd recommend to keep mercurial version numbers out of the
>>> mercurial code base (even if it's just for requirement names).
>>>
>>> Mercurial project version numbers are pretty much meaningless for any
>>> derived project which just use the mercurial code base.
>> 
>> Yes, that was also my concern. But the Java port, say, could just
>> remap the version numbers as needed -- it knows that the version
>> numbers stem from the Python version.
>
> Huh? Remapping requires file entries?

Ehm, yeah, "remapping" in the sense that the port would know which of
its own releases each Mercurial version number corresponds to. But that
would not work for old clients of the port, so let's drop this idea.

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Professional Mercurial support
http://mercurial.aragost.com/kick-start/