Hi Fabian, all
With rev1435504 the build should be stable again. The reason for the
broken build where some "old" version in the bundlelists, pom files
and also some wrong Import- /Export-Package directives that started to
cause problems after the version upgrade.
However there was also one systematic issue I want to describe in more
details as it will come up again with every release.
_Provider policy__
Imported packages that use "provide:=true" may cause problems with
releases that upgrade the version =.+.+. This is because the new
snapshot version is no longer within the version range of the imported
package. So if a component want to keep the dependency to the release
version one needs to manually define the version range of the imported
package.
Here is an example for the rules.web module:
It defines a dependency to
"org.apache.stanbol:org.apache.stanbol.commons.web.base:0.11.0".
However the Launchers where upgraded to the newest "0.12.0-SNAPSHOT"
version of this module. Because of that the "Import-Package" directive
"org.apache.stanbol.commons.web.base; provide:=true;" does exclude the
exported package version at runtime . This is because "provide:=true"
results in a version range [=.=.=,=.+.+) - in this case
[0.11.0,0.12.0).
To solve this one needs to manually define the version range to
"version="[0.11,0.13)"" by specifying
org.apache.stanbol.commons.web.base; provide:=true; version="[0.11,0.13)",
Note also that as soon as (for some reason) the dependency to the
"org.apache.stanbol:org.apache.stanbol.commons.web.base" needs to be
upgraded to "0.12.0-SNAPSHOT" this also means that the manually
defined version range MUST BE deleted again. That means that developer
that upgrade a dependency need also have a look at the Import-Pakckage
directives for packages exported by the upgraded dependency.
best
Rupert
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1435504&view=rev
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Fabian Christ
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Reto,
>
> 2013/1/18 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]>:
>> The usermanagement pane was added within STANBOL-721. This version had very
>> obvious bugs, this issue is to fix some of this bugs.
>
> Okay if this was a bug fix. It just looked like a really large one and
> then it is hard to see what is happening.
>
>> The legal aspects:
>> I've been resolving this issues together with Danny Ayers using a git
>> repository. I take the full responsibility for the code. As I paid Danny's
>> company for Danny's work and the intented the purpose of the coding (i.e.
>> contribution to Apache Stanbol) was clear I believe that I'm the copyright
>> holder for this code. I'm sure that if I'm not the copyright holder Danny
>> is willing to contribute the code to Apache. @Danny: could you please
>> confirm this.
>
> I am not a lawyer but as far as I understood the Apache way: From the
> ASF perspective it does not matter who pays whom for what or which
> (sub-)contracts exists. People contribute to the ASF and its projects
> - not companies. So individuals need to make the contribution. If you
> are the copyright holder - fine. But it seems that Danny is listening
> - so just stand up and announce your welcome contribution ;)
>
> Thanks for the clarification Reto!
> Best,
> - Fabian
>
> --
> Fabian
> http://twitter.com/fctwitt
--
| Rupert Westenthaler [email protected]
| Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907
| A-5500 Bischofshofen
