On 1/29/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Klügl wrote: > Am 29.01.2013 20:19, schrieb Marshall Schor: >> Eclipse-update-site: >> >> I think that the name of the sub-site directory in the composite site should >> not >> have a version number. It won't be changing from version to version; within >> that directory, multiple versions will occur (over time) in the features/ and >> plugins/ directories. > > My intension was to provide a subsite for each release. For > uima-textmarker-2.0.1 for example, we would just simply change the version > property (and some versions in category.xml), build the update site and then > add it as an additional folder to the composite repository. This would be a > bit less work than adding new artifacts to the update site. There would not be > any difference for the user and we do not have to touch already released > update sites. OK, I had not thought of that. It sounds like an interesting use of the composite update site approach. I wonder if there are any reasons to prefer one approach over the other.
The only thing I can think of is that having one site with multiple feature versions and plugin versions allows potentially more "sharing", for instance in the case where a new version of some feature upgrades some (but not all) plugins. I don't have a strong feeling either way about this at the moment... -Marshall > > The next release in mind, I already added the version to the name of the > folder. > > Anyways, this is nothing to argue about. If you prefer a single update site > for all version of a category, then I will remove the version in the next RC. > > Best, > > Peter <snip>
