Hi Marshall,
2010/11/11 Marshall Schor <[email protected]> > While preparing the 2.3.1 UIMA SDK release, I updated in my working copy > the > Eclipse Update site. I even tested it - it worked OK with 3.6.1 Eclipse. > > Previously, we sometimes managed to release everything more or less > together. > At our last release (2.3.0) we made the Eclipse update site have a version > which > was 2.3.0. > > I think this model is broken, though. > > Going forward, it still makes sense to have the eclipse "feature" projects > at > particular versions which correspond to uima component releases. So, for > instance, we have the uima tools feature at 2.3.1, and the uima runtime > feature > at 2.3.1. These feature projects bundle together (sometimes) as set of > plugins > at a particular release level. > > Later, when we release uima-as descriptor editor, that could be at 2.3.1, > also. > When that happens, the main update-site project (which builds the update > site) > will need a new version number. So if it was 2.3.1, it would need to be > 2.3.2 > or ??. This seems wrong. > > I think we should assign version numbers to the update site (which will > have a > new release anytime any of the features its holding get released) that are > more > like build tools. I would start at "3", and just increment this by 1 for > each > release. > +1 very good point, I think your suggestion is good. Tommaso > > The version of the update site doesn't show in Eclipse - what shows there > is the > versions of the features at the update site. > > What do others think? > > -Marshall >
