> > I expect there are two things at play. First, OSGi specifies things as > you indicate. An import of [1.2.3.qualifier,2) must not select > anything lower than 1.2.3.qualifier. Second, bnd does have heuristics > that do drop the qualifier and micro part in calculating the import > ranges from the exports on the class path.
Thanks for the clarification, I think this explains things. > [...] > > Conclusion, the spec is perfect but the implementations apply > heuristics and may have bugs. The specification says (or defines, if you like): "|micro| - A change that does not affect the API, for example, a typo in a comment or a bug fix in an implementation." It explicitly invites the developer to indicate a bug fix by incrementing the micro part. There's no hint or requirement that he should increment the minor part to reflect a bug fix. I do not find your statement "The definition of the micro version is that it should not make a difference in runtime" to be supported by the spec or the Semantic Versioning Whitepaper. Actually, this interpretation would restrict the usage of the micro part to documentation changes because every bug fix changes the runtime behavior. This is, after all, what it is intended to do. Considering this, lowering a lower bound of an Import-Package statement when resolving should be acknowledged as a bug. - Michael > > Kind regards, > > Peter Kriens > >> On 17 Jun 2019, at 12:14, Michael Lipp via osgi-dev >> <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have in my repository a bundle A-2.0.1 that exports packages with >> version 2.0.1 and a bundle A-2.0.3 that exports these packages with >> version 2.0.3. Version A-2.0.3 fixes a bug. >> >> I have a bundle B that imports the packages from A with import >> statements "... version=[2.0.3,3)" because the bug fix is crucial for >> the proper working of B. >> >> Clicking on "Resolve" in bndtools, I get a resolution with bundle >> A-2.0.1. I understand that this complies with the specification ("It is >> recommended to ignore the micro part of the version because systems tend >> to become very rigid if they require the latest bug fix to be deployed >> all the time."). >> >> What I don't understand is the rationale. I don't see any drawbacks in >> deploying the latest bug fix. Of course, there's always the risk of >> introducing a new bug with a new version, even if it is supposed to only >> fix a bug in the previous version. But if you're afraid of this, you may >> also not allow imports with version ranges such as "[1.0,2)" (for >> consumers). >> >> In my case, I now have to distribute bundle B with a release note to >> configure the resolution in such a way that only A 2.0.3 and up is used. >> Something that you would expect to happen automatically looking at the >> import statement. And if I want to make sure that the release note is >> not overlooked, the only way seems to be to check the version of "A" at >> run-time in the activation of "B". This is downright ugly. >> >> - Michael >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSGi Developer Mail List >> osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
