On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com>wrote:
> Hi > > I am on the Felix and Sling projects where we use commons IO and are > confronted with a OSGi semantic versioning issue with the Commons IO 2.x > bundles. > > According to [1] Commons IO 2.0 is binary compatible with Commons IO 1.4. > So I would assume all 2.x versions are binary compatible with 1.4. Am I > right ? I hope so ;-) > > The problem comes with the package export which is set to be the package > version of the library, hence 1.4 for the 1.4 release and 2.x for the 2.x > releases. From the POV of OSGi semantic versioning this stipulates binary > incompatiblity because of the change in the major version number part. > > Would you mind exporting the packages twice ? Once at version 1.5 (higher > than the last 1.4 library release) and once at the actual library version > (to not alienate original IO 2.0 clients) ? > I hope to hear from others but here some my first impressions. It feels wrong to mark something with a version (1.5) that does not exist... It feels really weird to mark something with two version numbers. Is that even legal in OSGi? How does that make sense? If a package is exported as 1.5 and 2.0 it does not break and breaks BC at the same time. At least that's how I read your definitions and the executive summary in http://www.osgi.org/wiki/uploads/Links/SemanticVersioning.pdf. > Would you consider a bug/patch and include it in the release ? > JIRAs and patches are always welcome and often help people see what is being proposed. The proof is in the pudding as the saying goes :) If you have not already, please check the release notes for all versions you care about in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/io/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES.txtto make sure the semantics are not OK as they are for OSGi purposes. Thank you! Gary > Thanks and Regards > Felix > > [1] http://commons.apache.org/io/upgradeto2_0.html > > Am 05.06.2012 um 19:38 schrieb Gary Gregory: > > > A heads-up to the ML: > > > > Commit'em if you got'em! > > > > I'd like to release 2.4 soon. > > > > FYI: My interest is in picking up the UTF-32 fixes, so any additional > > testing and code review is most welcome. > > > > -- > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
