ATM I think we cannot start doing transformers for 2.x model versions.
If nothing else we are missing baseline support for them (legacy .dmr
files, artifacts in maven)
but after that is satisfied there are not more barriers stopping us from
doing that.
But I think Paul's question is more in line of what we discussed on call on
how to go on with as8 vs eap.
--
tomaz
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Brian Stansberry <
brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com> wrote:
What's the problem going to be?
On 2/27/13 7:10 PM, Paul Ferraro wrote:
> Do the 2.x model versions need to be backwards compatible with 1.x
> versions?
> i.e. Do we need transformers to support a domain with mixed major
> versions?
> I hope not.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>> From: "Brian Stansberry" <brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com>
>> To: "Tomaž Cerar" <tomaz.cerar(a)gmail.com>
>> Cc: "JBoss AS7 Development" <jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org**>
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:30:24 AM
>> Subject: Re: [jboss-as7-dev] Subsystem model version for AS8
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> On 2/25/13 9:24 AM, Tomaž Cerar wrote:
>>
>>> What about XSD schemas?
>>>
>>> probably same rule?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Brian Stansberry
>>> <brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com
<mailto:brian.stansberry@**redhat.com<brian.stansberry@redhat.com>
>>> >>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, major version bump please. This makes it straightforward
>>> to avoid
>>> version conflicts with EAP 6.x. If EAP 6.x needs to change API
>>> in more
>>> than a bug fix way, they can use a minor version with no fear
>>> that
>>> community AS has already used that # for something else.
>>>
>>> On 2/25/13 7:11 AM, Tomaž Cerar wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I remember few discussions on IRC in last weeks(s) about how
>>> > to
>>> handle
>>> > version bumps for subsystem model when changes are done on
>>> > AS8
>>> codebase.
>>> >
>>> > It was somewhat agreed that instead of bumping minor version
>>> > we
>>> should
>>> > upgrade major version.
>>> >
>>> > aka instead of doing 1.2 --> 1.3, new version should be 2.0
>>> >
>>> > That gives us flexibility of bumping minor version to 7.x
>>> > codebase if
>>> > need arises.
>>> >
>>> > I am writing this as there was some PRs lately that bump
>>> > just
>>> minor version.
>>> >
>>> > So, can we get an agreement of new versioning rules, that we
>>> > will
>>> then
>>> > follow.
>>> >
>>> > I personalty favor major version bumps...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > tomaz
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ______________________________**_________________
>>> > jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>>> > jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> >
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.**jboss.org<jboss-as7-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>> >
>>> >
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev<https://lists...
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brian Stansberry
>>> Principal Software Engineer
>>> JBoss by Red Hat
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.**jboss.org<jboss-as7-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>> >
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev<https://lists...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Brian Stansberry
>> Principal Software Engineer
>> JBoss by Red Hat
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev<https://lists...
>>
>
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat