On 09/02/2011 18:55, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Fair point. I missed that quote, which doesn't seem to imply that
require bundle is far from a best practice ...
:-) That is also a good point.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 19:45, zoe slattery<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi
Throughout the web page, you refer to "semantic versioning of
bundles", but afaik, there's no such thing.
This is a quote from the OSGi semantic versioning white paper:
"Requiring another bundle is similar to a short form of importing all the
exported packages of that required bundle. The version of a bundle must
therefore semantically aggregate the semantics of all its constituent
packages. If any of these packages is incompatible with its providers then
the bundle version must increment the minor version. If any of these
packages is incompatible with consumers, the bundle version must increment
the major version. It is clear, that on average, the version of a bundle
will be much more volatile than the versions of its constituent packages,
increasing the dependency problems."
This indicated to me that bundles are semantically versioned.
Zoe
