Michael McCallum wrote:
3). Declaration [2.0, 2.1) should exclude 2.1-SNAPSHOT, but include
2.1-alpha-1, etc
Should most definitely not inlude 2.1-alpha-1 consider this scenario...
module Z released as 2.X
a dependent module Y specifies X [2,3)
you now make a breaking change and release the alpha version of Z 3.0-alpha-1
and BAM module Y is using it when it explicitly said I only want major
version 2
Michael - makes sense, I agree. Range should respect major/minor
inclusions. So in case [2,3) none of 3.* should sneak in.
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:51:17 Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Working on Mercury I faced the necessity to use some standard definition
of a "version range", so I took OSGi definition: OSGi core specs 4.1,
page 39 in April-2007 PDF available on OSGi site - http://osgi.org.
Some interesting ramifications for Maven users:
1). Declaration 1.2.3 means any version X, greater or equal to 1.2.3:
1.2.3 <= X. We are used to a soft version of that in Maven builds -
version can be replaced by a more applicable dependency. But spec states
ANY version: i.e. found in any scanned repository.
i always use ranges to do otherwise IMO is just asking for trouble ;-)
nicely stated ..
2). I strongly feel that failing any explicit ranges, containing
snapshots is a good thing. For instance, dependency declaration
1.2-SNAPSHOT is a range by definition, so I'd rather fail anything like
[1.2-SNAPSHOT,2.0) or [1.0,1.2-SNAPSHOT)
if you don't allow 1.2-SNAPSHOT how do you actually include them
lets assume that 1-SNAPSHOT < 1-alpha < 1-beta < 1 < 1.1 < 1.1.1
and i say [1,2) then -SNAPSHOT, alpha and beta will not match
alpha and beta will match, sn will not, because proposal is to treat
them differently. alpha and beta are real releases, while sn is still wip.
I always start my versions at 1.1, 2.1, 3.1 for the lower bound... otherwise
you end up with not being able to use the first snapshot of a new major
version in a range
interesting, something to think about
Thanks,
Oleg
And I use the -! syntax for the upper bound which stops the next major
versions first snapshot from creeping into a range for the previous major
version
Please comment if this does not sound natural or breaks some
well-established usage patterns.
Thanks,
Oleg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
