From 54a537e9b3ecca7c435c25d700e4b948c3342604 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guilliam Xavier Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:11:56 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Docs: Fix sentence after reformulation --- doc/faqs/why-are-unbound-version-constraints-a-bad-idea.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/doc/faqs/why-are-unbound-version-constraints-a-bad-idea.md b/doc/faqs/why-are-unbound-version-constraints-a-bad-idea.md index 21e59bbad..2039fa81b 100644 --- a/doc/faqs/why-are-unbound-version-constraints-a-bad-idea.md +++ b/doc/faqs/why-are-unbound-version-constraints-a-bad-idea.md @@ -16,6 +16,6 @@ For example instead of using `>=3.4` you should use `~3.4` which allows all versions up to `3.999` but does not include `4.0` and above. The `^` operator works very well with libraries following [semantic versioning](https://semver.org). -**Note:** As a package maintainer, you can make the help your users +**Note:** As a package maintainer, you can help your users by providing an [alias version](../articles/aliases.md) for your development branch to allow it to match bound constraints.