Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=DWcxiuTZiGN0TpIL7tJFrQuEm70H5or7bb1nxJxEIXaCHTcbN3Kq+NOe8ZvFblWelxIbmbSFJyHrVhxhfBEvGY22QNsFPXbw7gXPwunqJcyocdu0kf3c7AUYS/ZOCtkIu/cCIaDQy9fqgovyGG2ejGbSX9+Y2gZ8jqNVa/6NPEo=
  ;
Message-ID: <20051003145204.63910.qmail@web32608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 07:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Donald Woods <drw_web@yahoo.com>
Subject: Question about changes from (GERONIMO-957) Add version numbers to
 Geronimo schemas
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <1201197995.1127961559698.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Just noticed that the following client plans were not updated to use
the new versioned schemas - 
   j2ee-client-corba-plan.xml
   j2ee-client-security-plan.xml

but the following was updated -
   j2ee-client-plan.xml

Is this by design?  Will this still allow us to support/recognize
older clients connecting to newer servers?


-Donald

--- "David Jencks (JIRA)" <dev@geronimo.apache.org> wrote:

>      [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-957?page=all ]
>      
> David Jencks closed GERONIMO-957:
> ---------------------------------
> 
>     Resolution: Fixed
> 
>  Head rev 292333
> Many openejb changes
> M5 rev 292376
> openejb M5 changes are committed.
> 
> versions on both schemas and files are -1.0 or -2.0 (for openejb)
> 
> > Add version numbers to Geronimo schemas
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> >          Key: GERONIMO-957
> >          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-957
> >      Project: Geronimo
> >         Type: Improvement
> >   Components: deployment
> >     Versions: 1.0-M4
> >     Reporter: Aaron Mulder
> >     Assignee: David Jencks
> >      Fix For: 1.0-M5
> 
> >
> > The Geronimo & OpenEJB schemas currently have no version number
> in the namespace or the file name.  This means that when we have
> multiple versions of Geronimo,
> >  * It will not be possible to store schemas from different
> versions in the same directory (e.g. to include new and old formats
> in the schemas/ dir or post them all at a web URL)
> >  * It will also not be possible to tell from reading a schema
> what version it applies to (unless perhaps we do this with
> comments?)
> >  * When writing an application plan, it won't be possible to
> indicate which version of the Geronimo schemas it complies with
> >  * When Geronimo is parsing a plan, it won't know if the plan was
> written to a current or older version of the schemas
> > At a minimum, I'd like to add a version number to the schema file
> name.  However, the greatest advantage is in adding it to the
> namespace as well.
> > An alternative is to take the J2EE approach of leaving the
> namespace the same and adding a "version" attribute to the
> top-level element in every file.  However, that seems less
> attractive to me since we have so many schema imports (security,
> naming, etc.) and it would be unfortunate to need to repeat the
> version on every ejb-ref tag and so on, or to automatically assume
> that all the imports follow the same version as the containing
> schema (especially for something like OpenEJB which is on a
> different version track than Geronimo).
> > If we defer adding a version in any way for v1.0, I think we'll
> end up wanting to do it later, and it doesn't seem too nice to have
> "unversioned" mean "1.0" when all subsequent releases are
> versioned.
> 
> -- 
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the
> administrators:
>    http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see:
>    http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> 
> 


__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com