Re: [tycho-user] For Maven users: Questions about versions and Eclipse

["Oberlies, Tobias" <tobias.oberlies@xxxxxxx>]

Sorry, I still don't get the problem.

So you call the artifacts in p2 id_1.2.3.v0123 and in Maven id-1.2.3-v0123? And what is the problem with that? 

Regards
Tobias 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tycho-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tycho-user-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric Gwin
> Sent: Dienstag, 8. November 2011 21:46
> To: Tycho user list
> Subject: Re: [tycho-user] For Maven users: Questions about versions and
> Eclipse
> 
> Basically, I'm trying to figure out the "version" I should use when
> publishing OSGi artifacts to Maven. P2 seems to expect a filename that
> reflects the bundle-name and bundle-version specified in the manifest. It
> looked like Maven was doing the same thing when publishing an artifact,
> but it sounds like this may be an internal repository name.
> 
> Ultimately, I generate bundles, then publish them to three distribution
> mechanisms; zip installer (for web download as POJO), P2 for Eclipse, and
> a Maven repo for everyone else. I want to make certain that the objects
> retrieved by users are the same despite the delivery mechanism, and they
> work as expected for the respective systems as well.
> 
> The basic issue is whether an artifact say
> org.eclipse.snazzy_1.2.3.v201110040823.jar should be published in maven
> using 1.2.3.v201110040823 as the version to retain artifact integrity, or
> if artifact integrity isn't an issue (because the filename will be
> retained irregardless) and 1.2.3-v201110040823 should be used to allow
> version ranges and other Maven functionality (ie. use what Maven expects).
> 
> -Eric
> 
> On 08/11/2011 2:57 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> > What is the problem you are trying to solve?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Igor
> >
> > On 11-11-08 10:54 AM, Eric Gwin wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to figure out if there is concensus at Eclipse regarding the
> >> versioning of bundles in a Maven repository.
> >>
> >> OSGi/Eclipse requires <major>.<minor>.<service>.<qualifier> where the
> >> qualifier is some string designation for the build. However, Maven
> users
> >> utilizing "version ranges" would require usage of the Maven standard of
> >> <major>.<minor>.<revision>-[qualifier/buildno].
> >>
> >> Some experimentation on my part shows that Maven renames objects based
> >> upon the artifactId and versionId when publishing. I haven't confirmed
> >> whether they are renamed back when retrieved for a build. However, to
> be
> >> compatible with Eclipse they will need to retain the
> >> <bundle_name>_<M>.<m>.<s>.<qualifier>.jar naming. Do they? Am I wrong?
> >> Since I don't use Maven for building I cannot test it easily.
> >>
> >> Now Tycho utilizes P2 repositories, so the question is mostly
> >> sidestepped, but not all projects use Tycho to generate their bundles,
> >> not all projects generate only eclipse plugins, and not all teams
> >> publish only to P2. I'm wondering how other teams deal with the
> >> disparity between versioning schemes.
> >>
> >> I don't want to accommodate Maven publishing standards only to break
> the
> >> artifacts published (Publishing to Maven shouldn't preclude the bundles
> >> use in Eclipse). However, given the growing number of bugs I'm
> receiving
> >> regarding Maven support, I believe that ignoring Maven methodology
> isn't
> >> in the best interest of the project as a whole.
> >>
> >> Any comments/suggestions?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> -Eric
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> tycho-user mailing list
> tycho-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tycho-user