[Xotcl] info subclass

[Kristoffer Lawson]

On 26 Apr 2010, at 11:04, Stefan Sobernig wrote:
>
> Well, there is a slight difference between the [package] and TEA  
> versioning schemes. While for [package] version numbers,  
> compatibility is only indicated by the major version number (*1*.2.0  
> vs. *1*.6.0), this is not a strict requirement for TEA version  
> numbers. Here, as for the Tcl versioning (8.*4* vs. 8.*5* vs. 8.*6*  
> vs 9), the minor number can indicate possible incompatibilities. I  
> do not say that this distinction between [package] and TEA  
> versioning makes any particular sense (apart from the Tcl stubs  
> mechanism, probably). XOTcl has always followed the TEA approach  
> from what i can tell and, while being very keen to avoid backward  
> incompatibilities, does not give firm guarantees here.

Hm, I don't believe that is correct? In Tcl the minor number should  
not indicate incompatibilities to the script at all. Basically all 8.0  
scripts should run fine on 8.5. At least I can't think of any cases  
where this has not been true, and that's the main reason why some TIPs  
have been considered for 9.0 and not earlier.

-- 
Kristoffer Lawson, Co-Founder, Scred // http://www.scred.com/