geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject RE: Geronimo Schema Versioning
Date Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:31:59 GMT
I like having different namespace versions.  Visually inspecting the
instance document tells you what features you maybe using.  If
everything is 1.1, you loose that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandip Ghayal [mailto:sghayal@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:06 AM
> To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Geronimo Schema Versioning
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> Sorry I didn't answer your question. I missed that
> part :-)
> 
> Anyway this is what I suggest.
> 
> After a version is finalized (say geronimo version
> 1_0) We increment the version# to next version number
> for all the products. e.g next expected geronimo
> version is 1_1. Then then we will use 1_1 for all
> products. Even if there is no change in some of the
> modules.
> 
> So though the change is only in naming and no change
> in jetty still our shcema would look like
> 
> <web-app
> 
> xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/web/jetty_1_1"
> 
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/naming_1_1"
>     configId="..."  parentId="..."
>     version="1.1">
> 
> Offcourse we won't be able to track intermediate
> changes. But I don't see a need to track them anyways.
> Because intermediate changes are during development
> cycle. So it is possible that during development cycle
> naming_1_1 schema could keep on changing, but it will
> still be refered to as version 1.1
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Sandip
> 
> --- "Alan D. Cabrera" <adc@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> 
> > Not sure how that answers my question.  In my
> > example, you'll notice
> > that there are two Geronimo namespace versions.
> > What do you put into
> > the schema version attribute?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alan
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sandip Ghayal [mailto:sghayal@yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 7:42 AM
> > > To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Geronimo Schema Versioning
> > >
> > > I do agree the need to have versioning.
> > >
> > > Any format is fine that helps me identify the
> > version.
> > >
> > > And I also suppor the point that version number
> > should
> > > follow Geronimo Version number.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Sandip
> > > --- "Alan D. Cabrera" <adc@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Bruce Snyder [mailto:ferret@frii.com]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 5:06 PM
> > > > > To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Geronimo Schema Versioning
> > > > >
> > > > > Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > > > > > All,
> > > > > > 	I suggest we add the "Geronimo version
> > number"
> > > > to our schema
> > > > file
> > > > > > names and namespaces.  For example, a
> > Geronimo
> > > > Jetty header
> > > > currently
> > > > > > looks like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <web-app
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/web/jetty"
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/naming"
> > > > > >     configId="..." parentId="...">
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	And I'm thinking it ought to be more like
> > this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <web-app
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/web/jetty_1_0"
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/naming_1_0"
> > > > > >     configId="..."  parentId="..." >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	Or else like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <web-app
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/1.0/web/jetty"
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/1.0/naming"
> > > > > >     configId="..."  parentId="..." >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	I'm thinking 2 or 3 release down the road,
> > when
> > > > we'll want to be
> > > > > > able to look at a deployment plan and
> > identify
> > > > which release it was
> > > > > > developed against, since the deployment plan
> > > > format will surely
> > > > change
> > > > > as
> > > > > > we go.  It will also let us put the Schemas
> > on
> > > > our web site and
> > > > there
> > > > > > would be a more obvious correspondance
> > between
> > > > the namespace and the
> > > > > > schema location.
> > > > >
> > > > > I concur with Aaron and I vote for option
> > number
> > > > three with one
> > > > > addition. IMO, I think that we should add the
> > > > schema version attribute
> > > > > like so:
> > > > >
> > > > >    <web-app
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/1.0/web/jetty"
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/1.0/naming"
> > > > >        configId="..."  parentId="..."
> > > > >        version="1.0">
> > > > >
> > > > > I also have one question for you, Aaron.
> > Should
> > > > the directory name and
> > > > > the schema version atribute follow the
> > Geronimo
> > > > version? I would argue
> > > > > that it should so that we don't wind up with
> > > > Geronimo at, say, version
> > > > > 2.3 and the schema version attribute and the
> > > > directory at, say,
> > > > version
> > > > > 4.1. Keeping these items in sync with the
> > overall
> > > > Geronimo version
> > > > will
> > > > > save a lot of trouble in the long run.
> > > >
> > > > I prefer option two; I do not like dots in my
> > path.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think I have a scenario were your proposal
> > about
> > > > the schema version
> > > > attribute will not hold up.  Let's say that
> > we've
> > > > added some wizbang
> > > > feature to
> > > > http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/naming_1_1.
> > Now,
> > > > I want to
> > > > deploy this new feature in my web app:
> > > >
> > > > <web-app
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/web/jetty_1_0"
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> xmlns:naming="http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/naming_1_1"
> > > >     configId="..."  parentId="..."
> > > >     version="1.?">
> > > >
> > > > What schema version attribute should we use?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



Mime
View raw message