Ethan Quach wrote: > > Jack Schwartz wrote: > >> The AI manifest will be implanted with a version number when >> installadm runs. >> XXX See Ethans email about why he is against this. >> To the question of whether the AI manifest should have a second >> version number > > > I don't recall saying I was against this. In fact I don't recall what > this "second version number" is. I wasn't able to make this meeting > so if I missed something, I think I need a better summary here.
Oh, if what you were referring to here was tracking the schema version as a comment line in the schema file, then yes, I said I didn't like this. It's not a very elegant solution and I thought we should avoid this if possible. -ethan > >> >> A new method of versioning was put on the table: >> >> Each element and attribute in the schema would be assigned a version >> number. >> The manifest would be assigned a single version number. Version >> checking would >> verify that the manifest version was equal to the highest version >> number in the >> schema. > > > My concern about using annotations is the complexity it may add. > Afaik, annotations are used in conjunction with namespaces, and > that made it a non-starter for me. Simple changes to the schema > like "add a new element" may be easy to track, but changes like > moving or restructuring elements, or changing elements' meaning > seemed like it would add complexity to the compatibility matrix. > > > thanks, > -ethan > _______________________________________________ > caiman-discuss mailing list > caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
