> -----Original Message----- > From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: den 25 februari 2004 16:56 > To: Avalon Developers List > Subject: Re: [RT] Automatic Versioning > > > On Wednesday 25 February 2004 21:54, Leo Sutic wrote: > > Consider this: > > > > A -dep on-> B, C-1.3 > > B -dep on-> C-1.4 > > > > The obvious solution for the case above would be to deploy > C version > > 1.4. > > > > However, this may not always solve the problem if C-1.4 isn't > > backwards compatible with C-1.3. > > Yes, bad versioning in C, can lead to this. > But if "B -dep on-> C-2.0" doesn't help anyway, since if the > method signatures > are not compatible, there will still be problems, bumping the > numbers doesn't > solve anything by itself. Agree?
Yes. > So, in your LIST, I don't want to see "Method Removed from > interface increase > Major", but "Method Removed from interface -> REFUSE PUBLISH, > and demand package renaming." > Any non-backward compatible change, must result in "refuse > publish", and the guidelines for what can and can not be done > can be found in documents from Sun. A major version bump means that *anything* may have changed. Demanding a package rename is a bit too much. Consider the major version number part of the package name. I agree with the use of this tool - it is only for helping the release manager determine what changes have been made between the two versions. /LS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
