7 Oct
2010
7 Oct
'10
12:37 a.m.
On 10/06/2010 05:16 PM, Alex Busenius wrote:
I'm totally +1 on synchronizing version numbers,
this has absolutely no
disadvantages vs. the current situation (we are already always releasing
the apps together with the core), but makes it much easier to release
and to use.
Alex
I think that this is a very good idea. Personally I am confused too with
the current versioning scheme.
In order to maintain a certain degree of freedom for making application
evolve independently in the timeframe of a new XE release, we can adopt
a versioning scheme like:
XE Appliaction version = XEmajor.XEminor.XEpatchlevel.applicationversion
where XEmajor.XEminor.XEpatchlevel should always match the target XE
release where the application can be installed. applicationversion is an
additional number for making new releases of the application
independently of XE.
At each XE release every application will have a version bump to match
the new XE version, no matter if there are acutal changes in the
application (i.e., XE is branched with all its applications).
The previous versioning scheme can be a bit ugly in the case where
XEpatchlevel == 0 and applicationversion > 0 (e.g., Administration
Application 2.5.0.4 -> 5th release of the Administration application
compatible with XE 2.5 before that XE 2.5.1 or 2.6 is released)
But the invariant will always be: the first 3 components of the
application version will tell the user what is the XE version it is
compatible with.
This convention can also be enforced to 3rd party applications.
-Fabio
On 10/06/2010 02:28 PM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
I have been observing problems with the
versioning scheme which we are using.
Because applications are not branched along with core, when a bugfix version of a stable
branch is
released, new versions of applications are typically pulled in. This means that
`experimental' code
is being introduced into a `stable' branch in a bugfix version. This is not the path
I would choose
but more importantly we can't honestly say that our code goes through a
milestone/release candidate
verification process if some of the code is allowed to bypass it.
This situation has caused me to make a mistake which I was able to correct during the
release
without major issue, I think the same issue is behind the release of 2 bogus versions
(2.4.1 and 2.4.2)
There is another issue, users who want to mix and match applications to build their own
wiki are
faced with a set of version numbers and no way to know what is compatible with what. A
user who I
spoke with last night had this very problem. We could publish a compatibility matrix but
if we were
to show all the versions a given application is compatible with, that would require
testing each
application version against each core version and I think we need to concentrate on
testing what
gets released in XE.
Both of these problems would be fixed if version numbers were synchronized and everything
was
branched for a release. Relevant questions which come to mind are "do we need the
capability to
release applications at separate times?" and "is there no way to do that with
synchronized version
numbers?"
Am I missing any other reasons?
Should this not become a proposal?
Caleb
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs