[jbosstools-dev] Required bundles and version restriction

[Martin Malina]

Thanks for the input, guys. I didn't know about the different interpretation of this in feature.xml.
I guess I will stick with the explicit version ranges.
What makes me sad is that I won't be able to use [1] and be done. Every time I upgrade the version I will also have to manually (although I can script it, sure) change all the manifests.

-Martin

[1] mvn org.eclipse.tycho:tycho-versions-plugin:set-version -DnewVersion=<version> (https://community.jboss.org/en/tools/blog/2011/09/17/coping-with-versions-in-large-multi-module-osgi-projects)

On 4. 10. 2013, at 17:48, Nick Boldt <nboldt at redhat.com> wrote:

> It's always better to be explicit, because in plugin manifests "0.4.0" means "0.4.0+" and in feature manifests (feature.xml) it means "[0.4.0,1.0.0)". This is easy to forget, which is why I recommend being explicit, or else bookmarking this blog:
> 
> http://divby0.blogspot.ca/2011/07/manifestmf-and-featurexml-versioning.html
> 
> :D
> 
> On 10/04/2013 09:23 AM, Mickael Istria wrote:
>> On 10/04/2013 02:09 PM, Martin Malina wrote:
>>> in
>>> https://github.com/jboss-reddeer/reddeer/blob/master/plugins/org.jboss.reddeer.eclipse/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF
>> Keep in mind that "0.4.0" means [0.4.0, 2147483647.2147483647.2147483647].
>> Eclipse guidelines say that since only major version bump should cause
>> API incompatibility, it's better to use ranges such as "[0.4.0,1.0.0)"
>> since 1.0.0 and later wouldn't be compatible with 0.x.
>> 
>>> The reasoning for this version setting is to eliminate the risk of
>>> mixing different versions of RedDeer bundles that you may have
>>> installed in your local repository. What do you think about this? I
>>> didn't see any such thing in jbosstools source so I wonder if this is
>>> a real threat.
>> On the other end, it prevents any of this bundle to run with older
>> version of RedDeer, even if it's possible to mix them. It's a trade-off
>> between modularity and compatibility
>> As we usually ship bundles in features, and that features contain the
>> exact qualified version of the bundles to install, adding these
>> constraints is not very helpful for the normal installation scenario as
>> features provide much stricter constraints. However, if you don't use
>> feature includes, and only rely on feature "imports" and MANIFEST.MF
>> Require-Bundle to resolve dependencies, such change gives good hints.
>> 
>> Anyway, that's a very good question you have there, and there is a very
>> elegant answer in PDE: http://www.eclipse.org/pde/pde-api-tools/ . With
>> API Tools enabled in your IDE, you'll be able to annotate your APIs and
>> PDE will give you hints on how to deal with versions compared to a
>> baseline, depending on the API change you make. Also, if you depend on
>> newer APIs from another bundle, it will tell you to change the version
>> in your dependencies to the minimal version which provides this API.
>> 
>> HTH
>> --
>> Mickael Istria
>> Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools>
>> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets
>> <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>> jbosstools-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Nick Boldt :: JBoss by Red Hat
> Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio
> http://nick.divbyzero.com

--
Martin Malina
JBoss QA Engineer
Red Hat Czech s.r.o.
Purkynova 99
612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

Tel.: +420 532 294 265




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20131010/0ac3b2db/attachment.html