new
functionality. So a increasing the minor version instead of the bugfix
version makes sense.
From: Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 06:12 PM
Subject: Re: Versioning Policy
On Aug 18, 2015, at 12:35 PM, John W Ross jwr...@us.ibm.com wrote
On 20.08.2015 11:36, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Sometimes no exported package changes but you still have new
functionality. So a increasing the minor version instead of the bugfix
version makes sense.
I agree, but this has always been the case. The version reflects the
semantics of the package or
On 20 August 2015 at 11:30, Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net wrote:
On 20.08.2015 11:36, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Sometimes no exported package changes but you still have new
functionality. So a increasing the minor version instead of the bugfix
version makes sense.
I agree, but this
@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 06:12 PM
Subject: Re: Versioning Policy
On Aug 18, 2015, at 12:35 PM, John W Ross jwr...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Previously, you could count on a minor bundle version increment to
correspond to at least one package in that bundle also having a minor
version
@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 06:12 PM
Subject: Re: Versioning Policy
On Aug 18, 2015, at 12:35 PM, John W Ross jwr...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Previously, you could count on a minor bundle version increment to
correspond to at least one package in that bundle also having a minor
version
: Versioning Policy
Hi John, I went through the same feelings of trepidation at making
this change, but the reason for doing this in the first place is to
make the release process easier and provide a set of bundles that
users can know work together. So it's certainly a compromise from
: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
Sent by: Christian Schneider cschneider...@gmail.com
As long as the bundle exports the packages with the same version as
before it should not have any influence.
The only major problem would be if people use require bundle instead of
import package.
Christian
policy and where is it defined? Barring any responses, I will
assume it is still described in the link above.
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/13/2015 07:34 AM
Subject: Versioning Policy
What is the versioning policy currently being used? Is it still based on
http://aries.apache.org
:
No discussion on this? I personally prefer the policy outlined in
http://aries.apache.org/development/versionpolicy, but my main concern,
whatever the policy, is consistency and understanding how the upcoming
subsystems release should be versioned. What is the current Apache Aries
versioning policy
of the packages in one of the bundles within the same project received a
minor version increment, although not necessarily this particular bundle?
Correct.
Dan
From: Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
?
From: Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
Sent by: Christian Schneider cschneider...@gmail.com
As long as the bundle exports the packages with the same version as
before it should not have any
On 18.08.2015 16:28, John W Ross wrote:
So the release by sub projects methodology would follow the package and
bundle versioning methods described in
http://aries.apache.org/development/versionpolicy, with the addition of
rounding up the largest version increment out of all the bundles to
apply
changes I guess, although I wish we didn't have
uber bundles at all.
The versioning policy described in
http://aries.apache.org/development/versionpolicy is great when there's a
well-defined API, as in Subsystems. However, I imagine it can get a bit
hairy with things like aries-util.
I understand
whenever one of
its contained components changes I guess, although I wish we didn't have
uber bundles at all.
The versioning policy described in
http://aries.apache.org/development/versionpolicy is great when there's a
well-defined API, as in Subsystems. However, I imagine it can get a bit
hairy
: Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 08:55 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
Sent by: Christian Schneider cschneider...@gmail.com
I started a discussion [Discuss] Release whole sub projects instead of
individual bundles on 2015-05-20
version increment, although not necessarily this particular bundle?
From: Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
Sent by: Christian Schneider cschneider...@gmail.com
As long as the bundle exports
There are no concerns with a bundle version changing even though the
content of the bundle did not change?
From: Christian Schneider ch...@die-schneider.net
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/18/2015 09:39 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Versioning Policy
Sent by: Christian Schneider cschneider
As long as the bundle exports the packages with the same version as
before it should not have any influence.
The only major problem would be if people use require bundle instead of
import package.
Christian
On 18.08.2015 17:56, John W Ross wrote:
There are no concerns with a bundle version
What is the versioning policy currently being used? Is it still based on
http://aries.apache.org/development/versionpolicy and the Aries versioning
plugin? If so, it's not clear to me how subsystems got a major version
bump.
that has yet to come through. So it looks like messages are getting
through but very slowly.
To: dev@aries.apache.org
Date: 08/13/2015 07:34 AM
Subject: Versioning Policy
What is the versioning policy currently being used? Is it still based on
http://aries.apache.org/development
20 matches
Mail list logo
