Comment 4 for bug 1465709

Much better!

So we'd have the following protocol:

(defgeneric version-satisfies (component version))
(defgeneric normalize-component-version (system form &key pathname component parent))
(defgeneric formatted-version (component version))

Question: should we also have

(defgeneric version-geq (component version1 version2)
  (:documentation "True if VERSION1 is greater than or equal to VERSION2."))

I'm a little worried about VERSION-SATISFIES, because I would like to see us support both
(:VERSION <v>)
and
(:VERSION <min> <max>)
[I just made a backward incompatible version of XMLS]

and I don't think that programmers should necessarily have to write their own logic for V >= K and K1 <= V <= K2.

In this case, programmers would generally leave VERSION-SATISFIES alone and it would be sufficient to write your own VERSION-GEQ.