[windup-dev] Namespaces and URLs

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

We agreed the schema name will be:

windup-jboss-2.3.0.Final.xsd

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Ondrej Zizka <ozizka at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Sande, Marek,
>
> I know that all are used to -X_Y, but IMO it's a wrong tradition, let me
> explain why.
>
> The rule schema rules location will change with every change of the
> schema. The older schema needs to stay where it is. The old rules will
> refer to that schema. We might change our rules, but those rules which
> are outside our reach will have to refer to a valid schema URL.
>
> I remember that in QE dept, these a-b_c-D-e_F.G_h schemas were a source
> of bugs surprisingly often. Even your examples are inconsistent:
>
> http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-as-logging_2_0.xsd
> http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-deployment-structure-1_2.xsd
>
>
> Nobody really can tell why there's a - or _ or . .
> If we simply use the same version string and only use '-' before it,
> it's all clear.
> And, as I said - *the schema only expresses the constraint that is
> effectively inside of the released implementation*. So it's  really
> *directly related to the particular release*.
>
> The fact that we would use 2.3.0.Final for a XSD url or namespace
> doesn't imply or suggest that it has to change for every release. The
> string is in 2 places so far, in general:
> 1) The Windup source, where it should be a single constant in
> config-xml, referenced form it's dependees.
> 2) The XML rules, where it can simply stay the same until next review of
> the rule.
>
> Therefore I don't think it would create any maintainance that would not
> be needed if we use arbitrary version string scheme.
>
> The only reason I can see to keep 1_1 is to align with what someone
> coined up 10 years ago, which for me equals to sticking to a wrong
> solution. YMMV :)
>
> >> I am not really sure if it is good idea to have version in namespace
> Is there some other way for versioning the schema and the rules?
>
>
> On 26.5.2015 20:13, Sande Gilda wrote:
> >>> 3) I suggest to align the XSD version with the Windup core version,
> >>> since the XSD describes what the core accepts.
> >>>        "1.0" is not fortunate, as people will confuse it with legacy
> Windup.
> >>>        The version string should be the same as Windup version, so we
> can
> >>> automate things. Different formats are source of human errors.
> > I went with _1_0.xsd to follow the patterns JBoss uses. If you look in
> > http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/, you'll see none of the JBoss
> > related schemas use the JBoss EAP release number. For example:
> >
> > http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-as-mail_1_1.xsd
> > http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-as-logging_2_0.xsd
> > http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-deployment-structure-1_2.xsd
> > http://www.jboss.org/schema/jbossas/jboss-ejb-client_1_2.xsd
> >
> > Will the schema change with every release of Windup? I would expect it
> > to be more stable than that.
> >
> > Won't it be a maintenance nightmare to update the rules schema location
> > in the XML for the rules for every release?
>
> _______________________________________________
> windup-dev mailing list
> windup-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/windup-dev
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/windup-dev/attachments/20150527/4016f3a7/attachment.html