On Monday 04 July 2016 14:17:13 Konrad Windszus wrote: > On 04 Jul 2016, at 14:03, Oliver Lietz <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Monday 04 July 2016 10:04:10 Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > >> Konrad Windszus wrote > >> > >>> It was changed from 2.1.1 to 2.2.0 in r1714786 (for SLING-5301), but > >>> there > >>> was a release in between. Therefore the change from 2.2.0 to 2.3.0 for > >>> SLING-5665 seems right to me. > >> > >> Yes, sorry for the noise - somehow FishEye displayed the change as > >> directly from 2.1.1 to 2.3.0 - I verified with svn that your change is > >> totally correct > > > > Thanks. What about org.apache.sling.api.resource and changes in > > SLING-5757? > > Version was 2.9.0 before and is now 2.9.2 but should be 2.10.0, right? > > According to semantic versioning: > > A difference in the micro part does not signal any backward compatibility > issues. The micro number is used to fix bugs that do not affect either > consumers or providers of the API. > > In this change I don't see any backwards compatibility issue (although > NonExistingResource.getParent() behaves differently with the fix). But code > being able to deal with null in the past can almost certainly also deal > with a non-null return value.
Broken client code could stuck in a loop with this change when expecting to get a null for parent sooner or later (and not handling non-existing properly). So version should be 2.9.1 but not 2.9.2 (previous is 2.9.0). O. > Any other opinions? > Konrad > > > O. > > > >> Carsten
