geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lin Sun <linsun....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OSGi version for Geronimo packages
Date Thu, 06 May 2010 14:40:40 GMT
Right, that is why the final release needs to be called 3.0.0.final or
3.0.0.release and cannot be called 3.0.0!

3.0.0.final > 3.0.0.M1

3.0.0.release > 3.0.0.m1

Lin

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Keep in mind that in osgi, 3.0.0.m1 > 3.0.0 !!!
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 15:24, Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I think no. 3 is cool.   some other qualifiers that I can think of are
>>
>> 3.0.0.m1, 3.0.0.m2, 3.0.0.release
>>
>>
>> Lin
>>
>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Jarek Gawor <jgawor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Before the milestone release we might have to figure out what osgi
>> > version (if any) the Geronimo packages should be exported at. I can
>> > think of a few possibilities:
>> >
>> > 1) No version exported for milestone releases. In the final release
>> > everything would be exported with "3.0.0" version.
>> >
>> > 2) Use version "3.0.0" for milestones and final release. Milestones
>> > are milestones and should not be used once the final is out.
>> >
>> > 3) Add some qualifier to the osgi version for milestone and final
>> > releases. We just need to be careful to pick the right qualifiers so
>> > that osgi resolves to the latest version. For example for milestones
>> > we could assign "3.0.0.M1" or "3.0.0.M2" but for the final we would
>> > have to assign "3.0.0.final" or some other qualifier that is greater
>> > then 'Mx' using String.compareTo() rules.
>> >
>> > Thoughts or any other possibilities? I like #3 (or some version of it)
>> > but I'm also ok with #2.
>> >
>> > Jarek
>> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message