in reply to module version numbers

version looks nice... If you are targeting Perl 5.9 or greater. 5.8 is still very common in the wild, which may be a reason many module authors avoid it. (It's why I do.) Of course, you can list version as a dependency, but that adds another step to the install and complicates things for the user.

I personally use the numeric X.YYZZ format, meaning version X.YY.ZZ, as the most compatible format at the moment. (And I let ModuleMaker set it up in a BEGIN block, as that's easy.)

Really, it comes down to: Pick whatever you feel comfortable with that doesn't cause problems for your users. v-strings cause problems. version is a minor annoyance for anything earlier than 5.9. Numeric seems to cause me the least amount of headaches, but that's me.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: module version numbers
by ig (Vicar) on Jul 15, 2009 at 13:47 UTC

    Does X.YYZZ translate to version X.YY.ZZ or X.YYZ.Z00? I thought the translation from numeric to extended version strings took three digits after the decimal point for the second and third version numbers (midor and minor I think I have seen them called).