We've contributed a plugin to tycho that fails build if the version number is 
unchanged between build and a baseline. 

Maybe enable that in I builds to catch the very basic failures ? (It has much 
less overhead than full Api tools)


/max
http://about.me/maxandersen


> On 25 Mar 2015, at 12:02, Ed Merks <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dani,
> 
> 
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=463077
> 
> My general concern is that version increment oversights seem to be a general 
> pattern which isn't surprising because it's hard to know whenever you commit 
> something if that's the first commit for the current stream and therefore 
> requires a version increment.  Further more, there are ripple effects, i.e., 
> the increment for a feature.xml is most often dictated indirectly by the 
> largest increment in any included bundle or feature, and again, it's hard to 
> know whether this has been done yet for the current stream.   It might even 
> be the case that a service increment has been made already, but a subsequent 
> more significant change dictates incrementing the minor version (or major 
> version) instead, and then that ripples up to all the including features and 
> their including features.  In the case of the platform, such including 
> features are often in a different repository (and I know that there isn't 
> really     anyone who does more than check out the projects for their local 
> area of interest). 
> 
> I don't know how a human being can be expected to maintain this level of 
> complexity consistently and correctly.  I know I'm certainly not capable of 
> that, so I use Oomph's version tool for EMF to manage the bundle/feature 
> service versions. I know API tools help with major and minor versions, but 
> even here either those tools aren't being used or aren't diagnosing these 
> problems properly (and clearly can't do the job if no one is checking out the 
> broader source base).  In any case, the tools themselves require attention 
> and maintenance (and documentation), i.e., setting up proper baselines and 
> checking out containing features, so that's significant work as well.  Not to 
> mention the fact that in the case of API tools, the impact on build time is, 
> let's just say, prohibitive to the point of wanting to turn it off most of 
> the time.  
> 
> Regards,
> Ed
> 
> 
>> On 25/03/2015 10:07 AM, Daniel Megert wrote:
>> Hi Ed 
>> 
>> You're right, the minor version needs to be increased when the BREE is 
>> changed as per 
>> https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering#When_to_change_the_minor_segment. 
>> Please file bugs if you see outdated bundle versions. 
>> 
>> Dani 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From:        Ed Merks <[email protected]> 
>> To:        Cross project issues <[email protected]> 
>> Date:        24.03.2015 18:57 
>> Subject:        [cross-project-issues-dev] Equinox Bundle Version Concerns 
>> Sent by:        [email protected] 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Eike and I have been trying to address problems in Oomph related to the Mars 
>> Mac App layout changes and we're concerned that there appears to be a 
>> general problem with a lack of semantic version changes in bundles that have 
>> modified contents, in many cases not just very minor content changes but 
>> rather  major behavioral changes.  For example, it's clear that the p2 
>> eclipse publisher is significantly changed by this commit: 
>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/commit/?id=1b96ce896c49151b0e20fa49ba680d08415cca8f
>>  
>> In fact, this commit changed the MANIFEST.MF of the eclipse publisher 
>> itself: 
>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/diff/bundles/org.eclipse.equinox.p2.publisher.eclipse/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF?id=1b96ce896c49151b0e20fa49ba680d08415cca8f
>>  
>> I.e., it is changing the BREE but it does not change the version number of 
>> the MANIFEST.MF.  
>> 
>> The last time the semantic version of this MANIFEST.MF was changed was by 
>> this commit: 
>> http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/commit/?id=c847dee6f33950f48ecd1d8eca18729f6ffc470f
>>  
>> I.e., way back for Kepler.  The versioning guidelines are pretty clear that 
>> a content change requires at least a service increment: 
>> https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering#When_to_change_the_service_segment
>>  
>> I've not investigated more deeply, but my impression is that there is a 
>> general pattern of forgetting to increment bundle versions when the contents 
>> have changed.   Comparing Mars M6 (left) with Luna SR2 (right) I see very 
>> few things have been incremented, but surely there have been many changes.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Note the red outlined case where the Mars version actually has a smaller 
>> version number, 3.9.0, than the Luna version on the right, 3.9.1.  That's 
>> very wrong.
>> 
>> I hesitate to point out that Oomph has a version management tool for 
>> detecting when version changes don't match up with content changes.  I know 
>> other teams regularly increment all versions at the start of a release, 
>> which granted is not ideal.  But failing that, it's a difficult problematic 
>> to manage manually such changes and it's clear that it's not being handled 
>> very well because this isn't the first time during the release cycle that 
>> this issue has come up for the platform...
>> 
>> In case you're wondering, we're particularly concerned about this because    
>>      in Oomph we'll need to detect whether we're installing a product with a 
>> newer or older version of the bundles that support the new versus the old 
>> layout.  We're not even sure which representative bundle's version test 
>> though it seems clear we must not be relying just on a build qualifier 
>> change to test for content/behavior changes.  For us it would be ideal if 
>> these things were properly incremented for the final M6 repository 
>> contents...
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Ed[attachment "abhceiej.png" deleted by Daniel Megert/Zurich/IBM] 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
>> this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
>> this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Reply via email to