+1.
From:
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006
5:07 AM
To: wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [wtp-dev] Proposal to
move to "3.2 Style Builds" using ".qualifier"even for 1.0.1
I'd like to propose we move the same style of builds we
are currently
doing
for WTP 1.5, even in for our WTP 1.0..1 builds.
The
motivation for this is this would allow us to start using the same
".qualifier" form of plugins now,
in
WTP 1.0.1, and make for easier transition in a). our code streams, b). our
experience with it,
and
c.) future updates to 1.0.x, and 1.5. In short, its easier to have set of
naming rules, than two.
The
only reason this is a "proposal" instead of me just doing it, is that
there's a tiny side effect,
that
does have some tiny risk.
The
compiler we use to produce the byte codes of our builds is the JDT compiler,
and technically
speaking,
there is a difference between the version of the compiler in
the
"3.1 style" builds vs. the "3.2 style" builds. I have
gotten word from the JDT team that the
byte
codes produced should be "as good or better" in the 3.2 pre-release
version, but ...
But,
it does technically mean "a bigger change" than I'd normally
recommend in a point release,
so
wanted to float this as a proposal, and see if anyone knows of reasons not to
do this.
In
this case, I think the tiny risk is worth the improvement in versioning number
rules, especially
since
our 1.0.1 version and our M5 versions will be fairly close together in time.
So,
if there are objections (or, if you'd just like more time to consider), let me
know. Otherwise,
I'd
propose we do this as soon as this week's M-build is declared. To do in steps,
after weekly M-build
declared,
we'll first do a build with the 3.2 style build-tools, then I'll give the word
that
the
.qualifier can be added to both streams. Then, if there are some weird
unanticipated problems
we
would have time to 'back out' or otherwise react by next week's M-build.
Thanks,
=
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
The
following are some misc. tidbits that are related, for those interested in the
nitty gritty.
1.
All this is gated on us using the "basebuilder tool" from the
platform team.
I
have tried (and tried and tried) taking just the new "PDE" part of
the build (for the new .qualifier behavior)
and
using the "old" 3.1 compiler, but it didn't work and I don't think it
could easily.
2.
Just FYI, using .qualifier in he old "3.1 style" builds actually
works! but, produces qualifiers
with
just the timestamp of each build, not the version ID in the map file. This is
not only
not
helpful for updates, it will later be confusing when we start to use "cvs tags"
as the .qualifier.
3.
We can not easily "update" from 1.0 to 1.0.1 anyway so no great
harm in updating
all
the plugins. (other than the size, but the 30 megs or so are not all that
prohibitive).
4.
I have, btw, tried this on a local build, and saw no obvious problems.
5.
There is no effect on downstream components, as they would typically merely
"require"
1.0 versions, and they would continue to do that.
6.
Just to be explicit, this does not effect or change us pre-reqing Eclipse 3.1.x
as our base for
WTP
1.0.1 ... that part is all the same, and is independent of the basebuilder tool
that is
used
to actually create the packaged bytecodes.
