> From:
laurent.petit@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:53:22 +0200
> To:
tycho-user@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [tycho-user] OSGi qualifier vs. maven snapshot
>
> 2011/10/12 Igor Fedorenko <
igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Although this might work for your project, it really feels like a hack
> > or at very least requires long-winded explanation why it works so people
> > don't break it by calling their next release 1.0.0.FINAL or 1.0.0.GA.
>
> No more prone to errors than having people don't respect even/odd
> scheme or just call it 1.0.0 without much thought, IMHO.
>
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Igor
> >
> > On 11-10-12 8:35 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> >>
> >> 2011/10/12 Igor Fedorenko<
igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >>>
> >>> OSGi does not have a notion of "snapshot" versions, all versions are
> >>> treated the same and 1.0.0.qualifier is indeed considered to be newer
> >>> than 1.0.0.
> >>>
> >>> There are two versioning schemes that result is reasonable behaviour
> >>> both for OSGi and Maven.
> >>>
> >>> Use the same four part version (eg., 1.0.0.20111112-0735) for both Maven
> >>> and OSGi. This results in slightly odd version jump when going from
> >>> snapshots to releases on the maven side, i.e. 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT goes to
> >>> 1.0.0.20111112-0735, but everything works otherwise.
> >>>
> >>> Use even/odd convention to version snapshots and releases, i.e.
> >>> 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT/1.0.1.qualifier is released as 1.0.2/1.0.2.
> >>>
> >>> I think it is also possible to decouple maven and osgi versions of
> >>> released artifacts, i.e. use 1.0.0 for maven and 1.0.0.20111112-0735 for
> >>> OSGi, but personally I find this confusing and would not recommend. And
> >>> I am not sure if Tycho will allow this in the future.
> >>
> >> My third offer to you, which is what we're using here and seems (to
> >> us) most consistent :
> >>
> >> Use in releases a 4 parts versioning scheme :
> >>
> >> Let .qualifier/-SNAPSHOT do what they want : 1.0.0.20111112-0735 for
> >> example.
> >> Release with a letter as the qualifier, not just a 3 parts versioning
> >> scheme :
> >>
> >> 1.0.0.S (or 1.0.0.STABLE)
> >>
> >> => Thus, both for OSGi and Maven, 1.0.0.S will be considered> any
> >> 1.0.0.20111112-073 -like version,
> >> * you make both tools happy
> >> * you do not use even/odd convention which seems (to me) even more a
> >> hack than what I'm suggesting
> >> => Enhancement: it's not everytime that you'll build the "final 1.0.0"
> >> (whoops, "final 1.0.0.STABLE") release the first time. Maybe you'll
> >> use the same code base, but you've made a mistake in the bundling of
> >> things, and you need to restart the build (but not with the same exact
> >> version number) => for this quite usual problem, I'm just adding one
> >> piece : I'm not just adding ".STABLE", but also a "build counter" =>
> >> "1.0.0.STABLE001" (Definitely hoping I will not mess up more than 999
> >> times the same build :-) )
> >>
> >> This really works great in practice, and can also help with lifecycles
> >> including Beta releases, Release Candidate releases :
> >>
> >> 1.0.0.20111112-073
> >> 1.0.0.20111119-024
> >> 1.0.0.BETA001
> >> 1.0.0.BETA002
> >> 1.0.0.RC001
> >> 1.0.0.STABLE001
> >>
> >> ^^^ look : 2, B, R and C are correctly "alphanumerically" sorted by
> >> both maven and OSGi, yeepee !
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Igor
> >>>
> >>> On 11-10-12 7:02 AM, Matthias Koester wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> We are currently using tycho and the tycho-versions-plugin to automate
> >>>> the build of our product and use the standard maven convention of using
> >>>> "-SNAPSHOT" for development and continous integration. On our git master
> >>>> branch we use x.y.z-SNAPSHOT and drop the "-SNAPSHOT" for releasing our
> >>>> product. But we now have the impression that this doesn' t work as
> >>>> expected, because in OSGi 1.0.0.qualifier seems to be newer than 1.0.0.
> >>>> That means that if we reease version 1.0.0 of our product it references
> >>>> features and plugins from our latest snapshot release. Or am I missing
> >>>> sth.? If I'm right, the question is how others release there products
> >>>> with tycho?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Matthias
> >>>>
> > _______________________________________________
> > tycho-user mailing list
> >
tycho-user@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tycho-user> >
> _______________________________________________
> tycho-user mailing list
>
tycho-user@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tycho-user