I wrote some code to reproduce example graph. My code threw some exceptions.
Probably, this is because I don't
understand the version names/numbers properly.
Here is my code for version names/numbers.
Node n = session.getNodeByUUID("bcb13978-86d1-43d6-a4b4-8ebce471d4ca");
System.*out*.println( n.getBaseVersion().getName() );
n.getBaseVersion().checkout();
n.getBaseVersion().save();
n.getBaseVersion().checkin();
VersionHistory veh = n.getVersionHistory();
*for*(VersionIterator vi = veh.getAllVersions();vi.hasNext();) {
System.*out*.println(vi.nextVersion().getName());
}
Thanks,
Pulla venkat
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Pulla Venkat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Jukka,
>
> I got this documentation from jackrabbit source code but couldn't figure
> what it means.
>
> I am confused about how to go from versionname 1.0 to 2.0.
>
> My code does something below and always goes from 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3 ...
>
> Node.checkout();
> Node.setProperty("a","a")
> Node.save();
> Session.save();
> Node.checkin();
>
> VersionHistory vh = Node.getVersionHistory();
> VersionInterator vit = vh.getAllVersions();
>
> while(vit.hasNext())
> System.out.println(vit.next().getName();
>
> I would like to know when it goes from 1.0 to 2.0 and 1.2 to 1.2.1 to
> 1.2.1.1
>
> I can't reproduce example graph.. Can any body add snippet of code to
> reproduce the example below. Thanks
>
> Example Graph:
> jcr:rootVersion
> | |
> 1.0 2.0
> |
> 1.1
> |
> 1.2 ---\ ------\
> | \ \
> 1.3 1.2.0 1.2.0.0
> | |
> 1.4 1.2.1 ----\
> | | \
> 1.5 1.2.2 1.2.1.0
> | | |
> 1.6 | 1.2.1.1
> |-----/
> 1.7
>
> Thanks,
> Pulla
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Alexander Klimetschek
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I think Pulla refers to the version numbering in the JCR API, not the
>> > Jackrabbit release versioning scheme.
>>
>> Ah, you're right! I've been thinking about release versioning too much
>> lately...
>>
>> > 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?
>>
>> Here's the relevant documentation from
>> AbstractVersionManager.calculateCheckinVersionName:
>>
>> The name is determined as follows:
>>
>> * first the predecessor version with the shortes name is searched.
>> * if that predecessor version is the root version, the new version
>> gets the name "{number of successors}+1" + ".0"
>> * if that predecessor version has no successor, the last digit of it's
>> version number is incremented.
>> * if that predecessor version has successors but the incremented name
>> does not exist, that name is used.
>> * otherwise a ".0" is added to the name until a non conflicting name is
>> found.
>>
>> Example Graph:
>>
>> jcr:rootVersion
>> | |
>> 1.0 2.0
>> |
>> 1.1
>> |
>> 1.2 ---\ ------\
>> | \ \
>> 1.3 1.2.0 1.2.0.0
>> | |
>> 1.4 1.2.1 ----\
>> | | \
>> 1.5 1.2.2 1.2.1.0
>> | | |
>> 1.6 | 1.2.1.1
>> |-----/
>> 1.7
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jukka Zitting
>>
>
>
