commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Bodewig (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COMPRESS-399) OSGI package versions are overly pessimistic, except when they're overly optimisic
Date Fri, 02 Jun 2017 07:48:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMPRESS-399?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16034292#comment-16034292
] 

Stefan Bodewig commented on COMPRESS-399:
-----------------------------------------

I must admit that OSGi has been a low priority for us, likely neither of the people working
on Compress uses OSGi.

Personally I'd go with your third option. Is there some sort of tooling that would tell us
we are changing a package in an incompatible way so we'd know when to bump anything? We do
run japicmp http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-compress/japicmp.html but I'm not sure
it is reliable enough.

At first I was afraid using new major versions would cause trouble when/if we ever wanted
to create a Compress 2.0, but then again we would change the base package to be org.apache.commons.compress2
for this release.

> OSGI package versions are overly pessimistic, except when they're overly optimisic 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COMPRESS-399
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMPRESS-399
>             Project: Commons Compress
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Build
>    Affects Versions: 1.14
>            Reporter: Simon Spero
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.15
>
>   Original Estimate: 0h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The OSGI versions in the current distributions are not being correctly generated.  OSGI
relies on package version numbers following semantic version properly for correct resolution.
 
> Current version numbers have been generated from the maven version. This has lead to
new minor version increases for packages that have no API changed; it has also concealed 
 major (breaking) changes to several packages since 1.0.
> I have created two branches that address the issue.
> Both add the bundle:baseline goal to the verify phase of the build. 
> The also both have packageinfo files added to every package, containing the package version.
These are picked up by the bundle manifest generator, and are used if no explicit version
is given in the "Export-Package" command. 
> Both branches bump the major version number for packages with any minor changes to 2.0.0.
 This makes the bundle correct, but does not fix improper import declarations made by users
of earlier bundles.   
> One branch uses the version number  from the oldest version that has no changes when
compared to HEAD, and which has not had any breaking changes since 1.0.0.  This will fail
the build because version numbers should be increasing, and may cause issues if an importing
bundle uses a range that requires an identical, but higher numbered version of the package
> The other branch uses version 1.14.0 for all packages with no major changes. 
> A third alternative, which I didn't add, is to just set all packages be version 1.14.0,
and just bump major versions when required going forward. The bulk of the major changes happened
a good few versions back,  so it's not as bad as it could be. 
> If you have a preferred option, I can create a pull request on Github 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message