Re: [xwiki-devs] [discussion] Synchronizing version numbers of applications, plugins, and core.

On 10/07/2010 03:24 AM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: > On 10/06/2010 03:28 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. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "typically" here but I don't see the need > to automatically release an application whenever a bug fix release of XE > is made and I don't think our release managers do this. Let's take for example the administration application which is included in each release of enterprise. http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.4/pom… v1.37 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.4.1/p… v1.38 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.4.2/p… v1.39 in v2.3

http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.3/pom… v1.33 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.3.1/p… v1.34 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.3.2/p… v1.34 with a comment above that 1.35 is incompatible. http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2/pom… v1.26 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.1/p… v1.27 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.2/p… v1.28 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.3/p… v1.29 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.4/p… v1.30 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.5/p… v1.32 http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/tags/xwiki-enterprise-2.2.6/p… v1.33 So in the last three versions, every time except for 1, this was the practice. > If an > application has bug fixes too and these bug fixes are compatible with > the bug fix release of XE then yes, otherwise the application needs a > branch. Branching to keep bug fixes to backport separate from regular development is a good idea, but in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/platform/xwiki-applications/branches/ I only see 4 branches have ever been made. > >> This means that `experimental' code >> is being introduced into a `stable' branch in a bugfix version. > > That's not true. When you commit to an application you have to check > which versions of XE depend on it and if your changes are not compatible If the changes appear to be comparable then they should go from commit to release without any further testing, milestones or release candidates? > with all of them then you have to make a branch. > > I'm not convinced that synchronizing version numbers is a good idea. I'm > -0 for now. > > Thanks, > Marius > >> 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 > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs