On 05/01/2015 02:08 PM, Markus Keller wrote:
To those who had a wrong version range like [3.4, 3.5): Please find the bug in
your process that introduced this too-narrow
dependency in the first place. If a tool generated that dependency, then please
file a bug for that tool.
https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering#How_to_specify_plug-in_requirements
This statement is "correct" wrt rules & theory.
From practical experience I'd like to add that the problem runs deeper:
I've developed tools that got broken even by micro updates from
other Eclipse projects.
I read Markus' statement as a reminder that for Eclipse SDK bundles,
upper bounds of major+1 *should* be the right thing to do, agreed.
Unfortunately, this doesn't appear to be good advice for all of the
release train.
We could start a discussion about stricter enforcement of semantic
versioning on the release train (incl. an update of what exactly is
compatible API evolution wrt various technologies).
Or we can accept the current state of affairs as reality. This would
imply that letting any tool generate dependencies is insufficient -
it requires human judgment to decide which range is appropriate for
which dependency.
Or maybe both.
cheers,
Stephan
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
