On 18/11/2014 12:50, David Moner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I was not aware of this addition. It is clear that having these UIDs >> it will be simpler to check if the archetype has changed, as you say. >> But is it also the intention of these UIDs to be used to fill the >> archetype_id attributes in the RM instances? Or the link between the >> instance and an specific archetype will be done using the traditional >> archetype identifier+version+revision+build? Moreover, if now we will >> have unique identifiers with version+revision+build, why do we need >> an additional UID? >> >> David > Hi David,
What you refer to as version+revision+build is called majorVersion.minorVersion.patchNumber in SemVer. In addition you can have a "-alpha" flag to indicate that the archetype is still unstable. In this unstable mode a build id is necessary if you want to uniquely identify one particular instance of an archetype - there could e.g. be many 1.0.1-alpha (but only one 1.0.1 or 1.1.0 or 1.0.2). This is just SemVer as far as I am aware. So the complete revision could be e.g. 1.0.1-alpha+BUILD where build is e.g. a UID which changes each time (in a CKM environment on each upload), even if nothing else in the complete revision number changes. Thomas has called this build uid instance id in his initial email. Cheers Sebastian
