12:19 p.m.
Right. So I'm interested in what the specific problems are expected to
be with the clustering subsystems.
On 2/28/13 4:52 AM, Tomaž Cerar wrote:
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 <mailto:brian.stansberry@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
<mailto:brian.stansberry@redhat.com>>
To: "Tomaž Cerar" <tomaz.cerar(a)gmail.com
<mailto:tomaz.cerar@gmail.com>>
Cc: "JBoss AS7 Development" <jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@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>
<mailto:brian.stansberry@__redhat.com
<mailto: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>
> <mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.__jboss.org
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/__mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev>
>
--
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>
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.__jboss.org
<mailto:jboss-as7-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
https://lists.jboss.org/__mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev>
--
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>
https://lists.jboss.org/__mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev>
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat