On 20.08.2015 11:36, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Sometimes no exported package changes but you still have new
functionality. So a increasing the minor version instead of the bugfix
version makes sense.
I agree, but this has always been the case. The version reflects the
semantics of the package or bundle, not the API. So if new function is
added and no externals (interfaces etc) change, then the minor version
must still get bumped. This is so that a client of that package can
indicate its requirement for the new function.
Also, version numbers don't get bumped unnecessarily. Say a bundle has
changes that would ordinarily mean a minor version change, then the
minor version is bumped and the micro version zero'd out. All the
other bundles being co-released (assuming they don't have significant
ie major version changes) will also have their minor version bumped
(and micro version reset).
I would object to a the minor version (say) being bumped when all that
has changed across the whole release is micro changes.
I fully agree. If there are only micro changes then the bundle version
should also only be increased at the micro level.
What I wanted to say is that you sometimes have changes that do not
reflect in the API but still can fail existing clients.
If you know that you have such changes in the code then an increase in
the micro version would not correctly reflect this.
So basically what I am saying is that we should not blindly trust the
output of the version plugin.
Christian
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
