cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grzegorz Kossakowski <>
Subject Re: Versioning XML Schemas
Date Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:18:53 GMT
Joerg Heinicke pisze:
> Yes, I think it should be released with the block it contains it. I 
> don't know if its versioning needs to follow its containing block 
> though. Not every release of the block makes changes in the schema 
> necessary. Despite steps in the versioning it will probably be easier 
> though to follow the block's versioning.


> I'm against the SNAPSHOT suffix. A DTD or schema should never be 
> retrieved from remote, but always from a local version (via xml 
> catalogue or whatever). For somebody doing the latter it should be 
> obvious whether it's released or not since he works with the released or 
> the snapshot block. IMO it's just too much work to change all the 
> references from the snapshot version to the release version if they 
> differ in name.

I agree that renaming would involve too much tinkering but I don't get XML catalog solution
fully. Do you want to say that publishing schema 
is useless because we should always use XML catalogs for receiving schemas?

> Spring handles it the same way [1]. They did not even increase the 
> version number on changes [2]. Important is probably the backwards 
> compatibility. In that particular case: An XML written against Spring 
> 2.0.2's AOP schema works in 2.0.3 as well despite the additional 
> attribute. No idea yet when it is better to force the user to update his 
> references.

I really don't like such a solution. I really like to know that something released as x.y.z
is never going to change. Otherwise, whole 
versioning seems vague for me.

Grzegorz Kossakowski

View raw message