Makes sense, +1 for me on the scheme. Paddy Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message----- From: Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 19:26:24 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: Thoughts towards an initial release Hi, The OSGi core spec defines the Version as a quadruple 1.2.3.string. The first three parts are numeric and called major, minor and micro version number. The fourth part is a string (with a limited character set) which is called the qualifier. Version comparison is in terms of comparing each version part to each other. The numeric parts are compared as would be expected. The qualifier part is compared with string comparsion, where of course "" is smaller than "SNAPSHOT". This is where the problem starts: The (per maven) released version 2.0.0 is actually smaller than 2.0.0.SNAPSHOT in OSGi terms. That means, a SNAPSHOT version will always be considered more recent in OSGi term than the corresponding released version. That is why I suggest this seemingly odd micro version flipping. Hope this helps clarifying. Regards Felix Am Freitag, den 04.01.2008, 12:03 -0800 schrieb Padraic Hannon: > I only have a couple comments based on the wiki and email threads. > > > The Apache Felix Maven Bundle Plugin we use to build the Sling > bundles converts Maven version numbers > > to correct OSGi version numbers. For example, the version 2.0.0- > incubator-SNAPSHOT is converted to > > 2.0.0.incubator-SNAPSHOT. > > Why not just keep the names the same? Both end in -SNAPSHOT which > seems to satisfy the maven pattern. > > On the jackrabbit project 1.4-SNAPSHOT becomes 1.4 at release and a > new release is started, this is a nice simple model. However, in your > model we have this even/odd flip. The issue, I guess, is that OSGI > wants 1.2.3.4.String and not 1.2.3.4-String? What if we always have > 1.2.3.4.incubator-SNAPSHOT which gets promoted to 1.2.3.4? Do the > semantics of 1.2.3.4.dev-SNAPSHOT state that it is newer than 1.2.3.4 > since it is a revision of that which gives rise to the need for a > revision flip? The problem I see is in speaking of a release, for > example, if we are all working on release 2.0 we would be checking out > version 1.9.incubator-SNAPSHOT which is a bit confusing no? Is the > problem with going from 2.0.incubator-SNAPSHOT to 2.0 a problem with > OSGi recognizing the .incubator-SNAPSHOT release as newer than 2.0 or > is it purely a human thing? If a human thing I think it is > understandable that 2.0 would be the release version whereas > the .incubator-SNAPSHOT release is not. Perhaps (assuming that this > isn't a problem for the OSGi container) we could use the word .dev- > SNAPSHOT or something to be more clear. > > -paddy >
