On 29 Mar 2012, at 11:06, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:
[snip]
Sorry if this reply is a bit rushed. I'm on my Android
On 28 March 2012 16:27, Holly Cummins wrote:
B. We have a policy of using the minimum version of a dependency in
our
poms. That is, we only depend on snapshots of other Aries bundles
when we
actually need unreleased function.
I'm not sure this is completely adhered to. It's also difficult to
check to
see whether it's being done correctly.
At the moment we definitely don't adhere to this, which is one of the
reasons doing a release is so hard - we end up having to release a
bundle's snapshot dependencies even if we don't need any new function
from that snapshot.
How we check we stick to this in future is a good question, though.
The versions plugin can produce a list of snapshot dependencies, which
we could review occasionally, but that's pretty manual process.
Hopefully what might make it work is that changing poms to use
snapshot dependencies is more work than *not* changing them, so as
long as we're all lazy enough our poms should stay in the correct
state. :)
[snip]
Phase 1: We build twice in Jenkins, using the maven versions plugin
(with
an include list of org.apache.aries.*) to ensure we build both a
slice of
current code, and with the minimum versions. The artefacts we
release are
the ones with the minimum versions, since these are the ones which
can be
independently released and installed into a system with older
versions of
other bundles.
So in addition to our current build a new definition would do a mvn
versions:use-latest or whatever the right one is to use the latest
snapshots ... then it would do the normal mvn install etc?
That's what I had in my mind, yes. So we'll be confident that we'd get
a Jenkins build break if changes to one bundle regressed tests for
another bundle.
[snip]
Holly
