Le mer. 5 juin 2019 à 16:22, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 15:06, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Le mer. 5 juin 2019 à 15:59, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 14:33, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Le mer. 5 juin 2019 à 15:18, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure what problem this is trying to solve.
> > > > >
> > > > > How is it intended to use the facility?
> > > >
> > > > Ideally:
> > > >     $ mvn -Pbetarelease [... other settings ...] -Dbetasubversion=alpha1
> > > > where the latter profile would take care of changing the
> > > > toplevel package name
> > > >     o.a.c.somecomp
> > > > to
> > > >     o.a.c.somecomp.alpha1
> > > >
> > > > And, if the upcoming version is, say, "2.3", the generated
> > > > artefact(s) would be:
> > > >   commons-somecomp-2.3-alpha1
> > >
> > > That's not what I intended to ask.
> > >
> > > What problem does the ability to readily change the package name actually 
> > > solve?
> > > And how are the amended packages going to be used?
> >
> > Maybe, I don't understand the question.
> > The purpose is to be able to quickly produce several beta releases that
> > don't have to be compatible with other beta releases but that can coexist
> > for the purpose of allowing users to compare the impact of the changes.
>
> I don't understand how the user can actually test the release unless
> they also produce code that is likewise shaded to invoke the
> appropriate version of the package.

Of course, if they want to test "alpha1", they need to depend on it,
and modify their code accordingly.

> Surely it would be easier to test the code if it used the standard
> package names, i.e. no need to change the user code?

Yes, but that means that we cannot compare "alpha1" and "alpha2" in
the same code.

> i.e. take their app, and run it against the relevant alpha- or beta-release.

Then the main concern is the possibility of JAR hell (e.g. when several
"alpha" are in the classpath).

> This is already possible if the user has the ability to compile the
> component from source.

I think that If we hope to get help from users, we should provide a JAR.

Regards,
Gilles

>
> > Gilles
> >
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Gilles
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 17:35, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This sounds like a shade feature, yes. However, in order to
> > > > > > automatically extract the version extra data and detect a version
> > > > > > keyword like "alpha" may require some additional code, though maybe
> > > > > > the shade plugin already supports that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alternatively, JUnit 5.x uses a tool called API Guardian for marking
> > > > > > which APIs are stable or not:
> > > > > > https://github.com/apiguardian-team/apiguardian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 05:53, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does someone see a practical way to automate package names
> > > > > > > and source files conversions so that each all alpha/beta releases
> > > > > > > can be used together (e.g. to compare their behaviours).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I mean, for release version "1.0-alpha1", the top-level package
> > > > > > > name "o.a.c.compid" would be turned into "o.a.c.compid.alpha1".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This would also solve issues with compatibility checkers (with the
> > > > > > > added bonus that JAR hell could never happen).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Couldn't the "shade" plugin be put to use (so that all artefacts 
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > their top-level package transparently set to "o.a.c.compid.alpha1"
> > > > > > > and all the tools operate on that)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Gilles
> > > > > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to