Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-05 Thread chris . gray
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:19 PM, BJ Hargrave wrote: > >> Again, see https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls- >> 13.html#jls-13.4.15. >> >> If an API is released and then you change the API such that the return >> type is different, e.g. List to Collection, that

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Simon Spero
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:19 PM, BJ Hargrave wrote: > Again, see https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls- > 13.html#jls-13.4.15. > > If an API is released and then you change the API such that the return > type is different, e.g. List to Collection, that is a

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread BJ Hargrave
<njbartl...@gmail.com>Sent by: osgi-dev-boun...@mail.osgi.orgTo: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>Cc:Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?Date: Thu, May 4, 2017 4:51 PM  BJ, is that still the case

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Neil Bartlett
org > To: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> > Cc: > Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different > forms of backwards compatibility? > Date: Thu, May 4, 2017 5:40 AM > > Hi Simon, > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:46 P

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Robert Munteanu
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Simon Spero wrote: > Where this becomes interesting is if an OSGI framework is extended to be > able to rewrite calls from older bundles to use the newer method signature > (quasi-recompiling). That would allow the newer package to satisfy

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Robert Munteanu
e // mobile: +1 386 848 3788 > hargr...@us.ibm.com > > > > - Original message - > From: Robert Munteanu <robert.munte...@gmail.com> > Sent by: osgi-dev-boun...@mail.osgi.org > To: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> > Cc: > Subject: Re: [osg

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Simon Spero
>> OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance // mobile: +1 386 848 3788 >> <(386)%20848-3788> >> hargr...@us.ibm.com >> >> >> >> - Original message - >> From: Robert Munteanu <robert.munte...@gmail.com> >> Sent by: osgi-dev-boun

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Simon Spero
On May 4, 2017 5:40 AM, "Robert Munteanu" wrote: Hi Simon, Not to detract from your main point, but method return types are not part of the method's signature in Java. https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se8/html/jls-8.html#jls-8.4.2 Robert "You are

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Matt Sicker
i.org > To: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> > Cc: > Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different > forms of backwards compatibility? > Date: Thu, May 4, 2017 5:40 AM > > Hi Simon, > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM, S

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread BJ Hargrave
.orgTo: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>Cc:Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?Date: Thu, May 4, 2017 5:40 AM  Hi Simon,On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Simon Spero <sesunc...@gmail.com> wrote:>

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread BJ Hargrave
gi-dev-boun...@mail.osgi.orgTo: OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>Cc:Subject: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?Date: Wed, May 3, 2017 6:45 PM I'm trying to clarify some thoughts in my own mind about how different kinds

Re: [osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-04 Thread Robert Munteanu
Hi Simon, On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Simon Spero wrote: > I'm trying to clarify some thoughts in my own mind about how different kinds > of backwards compatibility interact with different kinds of version > numbering. > > There are at least two dimensions of backwards

[osgi-dev] Different conceptual version numbers for different forms of backwards compatibility?

2017-05-03 Thread Simon Spero
I'm trying to clarify some thoughts in my own mind about how different kinds of backwards compatibility interact with different kinds of version numbering. There are at least two dimensions of backwards compatibility of relevance: binary v. source, and provider v. consumer. Not all combinations