On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen
<max.andersen@redhat.com> wrote:
> The xulrunner have some weird versioning I would like to get cleaned up or at least documented why it is so:
>
> The bundle manifests uses three different versions:
>
> Bundle-Version: 1.9.2.16
> this is original XR binaries
> Bundle-Version: 1.9.2.16b
> this is slightly changed original binaries for Windows and Linux x86. I have added 'b' while modifying these plugins.
> Bundle-Version: 1.9.2.19pre
> this is binaries from XR nightly builds for Linux x86_64, it works the best on Linux x86_64
> The feature uses a "merged" version in 2 different shapes:
>
> /features/org.mozilla.xpcom.feature/feature.xml: version="1.9.216.qualifier"
> ./features/org.mozilla.xulrunner.feature/feature.xml: version="1.9.218.qualifier"
> 218 should be just a typo. Probably we it would be better if we leave 1.9.2.qualifier
eh ? no …why not 1.9.2.18.qualifier ? hmm i guess osgi doesn't like that.
Yes, it doesn't like more than 4 part versions.
Any how - we need to be careful about such changes since might not be possible to install via p2 if sudden change in sequence of version number.
>
> Questions for Yahor/Denis:
>
> 1) Does these ever change ? if yes then they should have .qualifiers in the manifest
> Yes, Denis and I are trying to keep it updated.
So what part of the version number do you bump on changes ?
We keep original XR version and add changes to the last part. Yes, it could be dangerous if we decide to downgrade XR.
> 2) Any reason why a mix of .16/.16b/.19pre and 216/218 ?
> Yes, see above. Different OSs need different XR versions. I will add comments to poms.
ok. thanks.
/max