Jason van Zyl a écrit :
>
> I was talking about this with Brian a few days ago when I saw this pass
> by the p2 list.
>
> At least in the case of Maven and Eclipse going forward in the future I
> don't see any downside to just using the same versioning scheme as OSGi.
> If it makes things easier for interoperability then I'm all for it. We
> would have to support our current scheme but anyone going forward could
> just use the x.y.z.qualifier notation. I realize that p2 would have
> touchpoints for things like RPMs and does this proposal cover that as well?
I think so. I do not know the details.
> In the proposal it says there is a SAT4J solution forthcoming and this
> is something I've talked to Oleg about. If you could declaratively state
> the strategy with a grammar, or XML file and generate version parsing
> schemes and dependency resolvers which I see consisting of the correctly
> generated equations that would be very cool and something everyone could
> use.
We are working with Genuitec on explanation support for p2.
This requires the use of SAT4J API directly, not through text files as
currently.
So we are also working on making life easier for the end users by hiding
all current gory details on SAT and let it work with domain object.
We are still usure of the best way to express the optimization scheme:
hiding the weights used to the end user by just allowing simple
preferences among domain object or giving more flexibility to the end
user by letting him do whatever he wants.
> I'm committed to trying to attain some meaningful level of operability
> between Maven and OSGi. As far as runtime modularity I believe OSGi has
> won (I have other things to say about the programming model) and it
> would be useful to have some mechanism for describing how the resolution
> would work and then generate the necessary machinery.
>
> The SAT4J solution is this the discussion you're having on the linux
> mailing lists?
p2 SAT4J solution is a tailored solution, and a new specific one is
currently needed for the OmniVersion resolver.
By linux mailing list I guess you mean the Mancoosi project mailing list?
Daniel
> On 7-Jan-09, at 7:03 AM, Daniel Le Berre wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> There was a discussion about version ranges management a few weeks ago
>> on the ML.
>>
>> I think that the following document from Eclipse p2 could be of interest:
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Equinox/p2/Proposals/Version_Type_Proposal
>>
>> Daniel
>> --
>> Daniel Le Berre mailto:[email protected]
>> MCF, CRIL-CNRS UMR 8188, Universite d'Artois
>> http://www.cril.univ-artois.fr/~leberre
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder, Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction.
>
> -- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kurosawa
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>
--
Daniel Le Berre mailto:[email protected]
MCF, CRIL-CNRS UMR 8188, Universite d'Artois
http://www.cril.univ-artois.fr/~leberre
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
