Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 19360 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2010 04:09:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 23 Aug 2010 04:09:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 93945 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2010 04:09:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 93650 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2010 04:08:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 93643 invoked by uid 99); 23 Aug 2010 04:08:56 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:08:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of xhhsld@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.50] (HELO mail-ww0-f50.google.com) (74.125.82.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:08:34 +0000 Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so398457wwf.31 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:08:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=yn6O6UZiHtB7dQ7uNT7mkEUkxqTR7iLR0082Vw21IVE=; b=Zo95T7VjvvGBYFjYuEoydzOPDspZ+wg1B5D7GNudQC0ocXJrWtaHw52SbqEng5de5a uhjx6CwBNjiJJJp2a/P/oN5Vbixak21TTWof9YEJd3AssPUO6eX7jzUolWkrsQSTDwgV huY/ZmjNpePoJTWlGvJ3Do9TUzK6TbRBkbQ/U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ZraXfyndJonDxC0qiBwBSXgR9NgD1Jbal6ZSu2irXOkiaxy/iBfekCOLX2XrAa8BBA Si1ezF4/IrrqF4Lf1E7puf6UmLhk1EMEEFDcA6y92ovjqy7nmsybqYXJR/Z4lNHIjT9d TAdPIWMQj8D+as+aDkavXA7FmoCQA0g0dq/mc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.236.226 with SMTP id w76mr4043487weq.7.1282536494023; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.229.223 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:08:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <09457CE3-AA3A-4B15-9E02-88030AA6AF45@yahoo.com> References: <09457CE3-AA3A-4B15-9E02-88030AA6AF45@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:08:13 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Schema version number update ? From: Ivan To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd402c42345f6048e75cc77 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --000e0cd402c42345f6048e75cc77 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Just read the article, it gave a new rule for how to update the schmea files, No sure I undertand it clearly, IMO, if the schema files is widely distributed, it is better to update the version number or namespace, even the changes will not break structure, or it will make users confusions for various schema files with the same version number. Anyway, I just updated the persistence version in the schema files without changing the namespace. 2010/8/19 David Jencks > IIUC xml schema versioning best practice is to make sure the changes are > backward compatible, keep the schema namespace the same, and have something > like a version attribute you bump up. > > We are going to have some non-backward compatible changes in the > environment element for some 3.x version since how we specify classloaders > has completely changed. I wonder if this would be a good time to carefully > reexamine out schemas and use a more recommended approach? > > cf > http://www.pluralsight-training.net/community/blogs/tewald/archive/2006/04/14/21733.aspx > > thanks > david jencks > > On Aug 18, 2010, at 6:12 PM, Ivan wrote: > > Comments ? > > 2010/8/17 chi runhua > >> Agree. Doc will need updates as well and users might be interested in >> such changes if they plan to migrate from 2.x to 3.0. >> >> Jeff >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Ivan wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> We might need to update some schemas, like openejb-jar, tomcat might >>> also needed. IMO, we need to update the version number in each release when >>> we did changes to the schema files, right ? However, I find that >>> geronimo-openejb-2.0.xsd has been existed there for a long time, and many >>> changes are done to it, but we never update the schema version number. >>> Any comment? Thanks ! >>> >>> -- >>> Ivan >>> >> >> > > > -- > Ivan > > > -- Ivan --000e0cd402c42345f6048e75cc77 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just read the article, it gave a new rule for how to update the schmea file= s, No sure I undertand it clearly,=A0 IMO, if the schema files is widely di= stributed, it is better to update the version number or namespace, even the= changes will not break structure, or it will make users confusions for var= ious schema files with the same version number.
Anyway, I just updated the persistence version in the schema files without = changing the namespace.

2010/8/19 David J= encks <david= _jencks@yahoo.com>
IIUC xml schema versioning best practice is to make su= re the changes are backward compatible, keep the schema namespace the same,= and have something like a version attribute you bump up.

We are going to have some non-backward compatible changes in= the environment element for some 3.x version since how we specify classloa= ders has completely changed. =A0I wonder if this would be a good time to ca= refully reexamine out schemas and use a more recommended approach?


thanks
david jencks
=A0
On Aug 18, 2010, at 6:12 PM, Ivan wrote= :

Comments ?

2010/8/17 chi runhua <chirunhua@gmail.com>
Agree. =A0Doc will need updates as well and users might be interested in su= ch changes if they plan to migrate from 2.x to 3.0.

Jeff= =A0


On Tue, Aug 17, = 2010 at 4:00 PM, Ivan <xhhsld@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
=A0=A0=A0 = We might need to update some schemas, like openejb-jar, tomcat might also n= eeded. IMO, we need to update the version number in each release when we di= d changes to the schema files, right ? However, I find that geronimo-openej= b-2.0.xsd has been existed there for a long time, and many changes are done= to it, but we never update the schema version number.
=A0=A0=A0 Any comment? Thanks !

--
Ivan




--
Ivan




--
Ivan
--000e0cd402c42345f6048e75cc77--