[windup-dev] Namespaces and URLs

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

We will also attempt to keep an unversioned schema (or symlink) that is
always pointing to the latest version.

windup-jboss.xsd

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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."
>



-- 
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/20150527/13489c4d/attachment.html