I've never understood why CPAN authors put their module numbers so low.
I'd guess that, at the beginning, it's a confidence issue. I'd think of it as, hey, I'm posting a module that seems to work for me, but it hasn't been widely tested yet: let's not get everyone's hopes up. After that, well, small incremental changes don't really merit a major version number increment, do they?
I agree with you; it's always rather odd to see stable, mature software with a sub-1.0 version number (slrn, anyone?). Of course, there's plenty of "production" software that really shouldn't be out of alpha yet.
Yours in pedantry,
"Anything you put in comments is not tested and easily goes out of date." -- tye
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
Want more info? How to link or
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.