Re: [jbosstools-dev] Version bumps for JBT 4.1.1 / JBT 4.2

/me forwards this to the other list as requested -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Version bumps for JBT 7.1.0 / JBDS 8.0.0 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 11:04:34 +0200 From: Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com&gt; To: Alexey Kazakov <akazakov(a)exadel.com&gt; CC: Nick Boldt <nboldt(a)redhat.com&gt;, external-exadel-list@redhat.**com&lt;external-exadel-list(a)redhat.com&gt; btw. please use jbosstools-dev for tech stuff like this - not external-exadel-list. /max On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 12:03:09PM -0700, Alexey Kazakov wrote: > OK, I got it. > We have changed CDI and JSF in 4.1.x since 4.1.0.Final. And we have > bumped CDI version (1.5.0->1.5.1) and JSF (3.5.0->3.5.1). > Seam has not changed since 4.1.0.Final (no code changes, no version > bumping) because we thought we should not bump unchanged components. > OK. It's not correct anymore (if it ever was) and we should bump the > unchanged seam component for 4.1.1.Beta1 too (3.5.0->3.5.1) because we > have changed and bumped CDI and JSF which are parts of the same github > repo. > I will fix it for Beta1 for seam. > > > On 10/04/2013 11:33 AM, Nick Boldt wrote: > >> Yes, that was the suggestion from Max yesterday. >> >> He seems to want to treat entire github repos as single entities >> when dealing with version bumps. >> >> So, if ANY of the subcomponents in a repo change, ALL the >> subcomponents should increment their .y or .z digit accordingly. >> >> In the attachments on this thread, I've assumed that the reason >> nothing was bumped is because nothing had changed, so that bumping >> from 3.5.0 to 3.5.1 and 3.5.100 was reasonable. >> >> If in fact something DID change, or WILL change before GA of JBDS >> 7.1 or 8.0, then perhaps 3.6.0 is a better version to use. The >> amount of change determines which version makes more sense, and of >> course you'll know that more than I will since you're committing the >> changes. >> >> >> On 10/04/2013 02:15 PM, Alexey Kazakov wrote: >> >>> So if we have bumped javaee (because of changes in cdi and jsf) we >>> should bump seam too even if it doesn't have any changes, correct? >>> >>> On 10/04/2013 11:10 AM, Nick Boldt wrote: >>> >>>> Max, >>>> >>>> I took a look a copy of the latest versionwatch report, dumped it into >>>> OpenOffice Calc, and cleaned out all the places where features & >>>> versions WERE incremented. >>>> >>>> What's left is a list of plugins and features in JBDS 7.x (4.1.x >>>> branch) and 8.0 (master branch) where it appears that some things >>>> haven't been correctly upversioned. >>>> >>>> Worst offender is org.jboss.tools.vpe, where master branch is 3.5.0 >>>> but 4.1.x branch is 3.5.1. Other IUs listed should move up too since >>>> their parent projects have bumped (ie., if anything in Base has >>>> bumped, so too should runtime and usage; if part of JavaEE has bumped, >>>> so too should Seam). >>>> >>>> See attached screenshot and .ods spreadsheet. I haven't opened JIRAs >>>> for these issues yet - wanted your +1 on them first. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ jbosstools-dev mailing list jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev