Re: [rt-pmc] [ECF] API breaking change in service release 3.6.1 for REST

[Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Looking at the commit for this [1] it does appear that the bundle in question got semantically versioned correctly.  Both the package and the bundle version got a major version bump.  All ECF is doing here is not bumping their marketing version of the project.  I don't think we have rules that the marketing version must adhere to semantic versioning.  From ECF's perspective this is a minor release of the overall project and they want that to be reflected in their marketing version of the project.

I would +1 this once Markus has confirmed my understanding.

Tom

[1] http://git.eclipse.org/c/ecf/org.eclipse.ecf.git/commit/?id=741562492bde53d1818a596f0f13fb7f69a35765


Glyn Normington ---05/24/2013 10:26:20 AM---I can't say I'm keen to give this a +1. Is there some user facing documentation that highlights the

From: Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Runtime Project PMC mailing list <rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 05/24/2013 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: [rt-pmc] [ECF] API breaking change in service release 3.6.1 for REST based remote services
Sent by: rt-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

I can't say I'm keen to give this a +1.

Is there some user facing documentation that highlights the breaking change and the action the user needs to take? Or is that something that will just be mentioned in the release notes?

I didn't see a post about this in the ECF community forum ([1]). Or do you think the majority of ECF users hang out on ecf-dev?

Why not simply bump your version to acknowledge the breaking change? (I did that for Gemini Blueprint 2.0 because a bug fix was mildly incompatible, so you can see where I'm coming from!)

Regards,
Glyn
[1] http://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php?t=thread&frm_id=99

On 24 May 2013, at 15:14, Markus Alexander Kuppe <rt-pmc_eclipse.org@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

ECF is going to have its service release 3.6.1 end of month.

After a discussion during one of our regular conf calls [1] and a
notification on the ecf-dev mailing list last week [2] in which the
community hasn't vetoed this API change, we decided to include a
(breaking) change in our REST based remote service API in 3.6.1.

The bug [3] itself has a simple and straight forward migration path and
thus is low risk, while simultaneously allowing users to address more
sophisticated usecases.

All in all, we would like to get consent for this change from the RT
pmc. Please +1.

Thanks
Markus

[1] http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/ecf-dev/msg06298.html
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/ECF_Conference_Call_5.14.2013
[3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/408034
_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc

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