Re: [p2-dev] p2 bundle versions

[Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

This is kind of my original point. If the interface is expected to be implemented by clients (does not have an @noimplement tag) then it is a breaking API change and would force an update of the major version. But in many cases we have friends relationships in the p2 bundles that allow p2 bundles to implement "internal" API of other p2 bundles. In these cases it may be appropriate to have a more brittle relationship between the friends relationships.

Tom



Ian Bull ---07/12/2010 03:42:18 PM---When a new method is added to an interface, do we not up the major version number? cheers,

From:	Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	P2 developer discussions <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	07/12/2010 03:42 PM
Subject:	Re: [p2-dev] p2 bundle versions

---

When a new method is added to an interface, do we not up the major version number?

cheers,
ian

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

One thing to keep in mind is the difference between an implementer of some API and a client of it. I am not sure if this is the case you mention below but if one bundle is implementing an interface defined in another bundle then a more tightly bound version range may be needed to ensure new methods are not added to the interface being implemented.

Tom



Ian Bull ---07/12/2010 03:19:08 PM---As part of the work I did on [1], I added a new method to the MetadataFactory. Since this class is API, I've up'd the version n

From:	Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	P2 developer discussions <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	07/12/2010 03:19 PM
Subject:	[p2-dev] p2 bundle versions

---





As part of the work I did on [1], I added a new method to the MetadataFactory. Since this class is API, I've up'd the version number (to 2.1.0) and added the @since tag to the new method. However, the engine had requiredBundle dependency on the metadata with a pretty strict dependency [2.0.0, 2.1.0).  I'm not sure we need the range this tight.  I've opened it up a bit more [2.0.0, 2.2.0) and increased the version of the engine to 2.0.1.  

[1] 279015: Support update descriptor advice in p2.inf
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=279015

So I have a few questions:
1. Is that the right approach?
2. Can we open up the engine even more, say [2.0.0, 3.0.0), or is there a reason for the tight range?

cheers,
ian

--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev



_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev

-- 
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev