On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:38 AM, Pulla Venkat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> version numbers in jackrabbit appear like 1.1,1.2,1.3 etc. not like 1,2,3 >> etc.. For our application version numbers should like 1.0,2.0 etc. we may >> convert numbers 1.1 ,1.2 etc to 1.0 ,2.0 . >> >> When does jackrabbit allow 1.0 to 2.0 transition in version name. Does this >> happen in any scenario? >> I couldn't understand the logic for version names being 1.1 ,1.2 etc. Is >> 1.2.1 ,1.2.1.1 etc also possible. > > We use a MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH version numbering scheme:
I think Pulla refers to the version numbering in the JCR API, not the Jackrabbit release versioning scheme. Which I find to be weird, too, since the leading "1." never changes and is redundant information. It's not a difficult thing for an application to remove that prefix for displaying simpler version numbers or to simply count the versions themselves, but I wonder if there was any reason for this decision. A future feature maybe? Something like branching? Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
