Re: Partial version numbers in master

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

> I don't see one either, but there appear to be scores in the wild that
> use them (I saw an example on the user list, which is what triggered
> the original post). The question is whether we consider it fine to
> start giving an error on them (it's not a fatal error, doesn't prevent
> compilation of the score). I would agree that it's not good practice
> for development releases. For stable releases though, "works with
> 2.22.0" is supposed to imply "works with every 2.22.x", so I wonder
> if there is a case for accepting it.

FWIW: I'm one of those guilty of using \version 2.22 occasionally 
(namely when I write source manually and do not rely on Frescobaldi's 
feature to create the \version statement automatically).

I use it not to mean "works with 2.22" (which doesn't make much sense 
since there is no LilyPond 2.22) but to mean "uses 2.22 line features 
and/or syntax".

Of course, this is only really meaningful for stable release series. But 
development releases are to be used at your own risk anyway.

So I'd prefer if LilyPond continued to accept \version 2.22 as a version 
declaration (and then complain iff we're in a version below that). But I 
admit that this version declaration is not really helpful for using 
convert-ly.

How about accepting 2.XX style version declarations only for XX = 0 (mod 2)?

Lukas