coapp-developers team mailing list archive

[Eric Schultz <wwahammy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Alright we know have a property called COAPP_VERSION with the version number
in it.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Garrett Serack <garretts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  It's not the years, it's the mileage.
>
>  :D
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Eric Schultz [wwahammy@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 18, 2011 7:53 AM
> *To:* Garrett Serack
> *Cc:* coapp-developers
> *Subject:* Re: New CO_VERSION table
>
>  ... There you go coming up with better ideas than me. That does make more
> sense :) I will do that instead.
>
>  Eric
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Garrett Serack <garretts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>>  Why not just stick a value into the PROPERTY table; if it's just one
>> key/value, it'll save on creating a whole new table...
>>
>>  G
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Eric Schultz [wwahammy@xxxxxxxxx]
>> *Sent:* Monday, April 18, 2011 3:06 AM
>> *To:* Garrett Serack; coapp-developers
>> *Subject:* New CO_VERSION table
>>
>>   All,
>>
>>  I'm adding a CO_VERSION table to packages now. It will always contain
>> one row with a column of type "string" and category "Version" called
>> "coapp_version". This, unsurprisingly, will contain the version of CoApp
>> that created the package. Looking forward, there's may be a point where
>> there are enough changes between CoApp versions that newer packages might
>> not be fully compatible with older versions. This is a surefire way to
>> figure out which version of CoApp actually made a particular package.
>>
>>  Eric
>>
>
>