Hi,

 

I am inclined to say no unless preferences from .settings are used in the our 
build. Right now we don’t use any of these preferences in our regular builds. 
Also we don’t include these in source bundles. I would say .settings needs to 
be considered only when these preferences are used in the maven build. 
Currently we don’t have any plugin that uses preferences from .settings during 
maven build(they may be using these settings for eclipse build but that is for 
developer’s use).

 

Thanks

Sravan

 

From: Mickael Istria <mist...@redhat.com> 
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 6:11 PM
To: Eclipse platform general developers list. <platform-dev@eclipse.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [platform-dev] Should .settings/ participate in version 
qualifier or not?

 

Hi all,

 

In some other thread, you saw that some changes I've put in parent pom that 
-amont others- excluded the .settings/ from qualifier computation.

While I expected no trouble, this actually and unfortunately caused some 
issues, so it was noticed and is discussed (while in some other more lucky 
circumstances in which no bundle had a .settings/ change as last change, it 
wouldn't have been noticed and there would be no debate and things would be 
settled) and the change was reverted.

This change per se is not related to other bugs about API Tools, we managed to 
separate both issues, so let's now get back to the mailing-list rather than 
polluting API Tools bugs.

 

I'd like to gather opinions about "Should .settings/ participate in version 
qualifier or not?".

The current state is yes. When one change any project settings (resulting as 
some .settings/blah.prefs file change), the bundle version needs to be bumped 
if it was not already, otherwise a failure would be reported because 
of"qualifier-only version increase compared to last release (which is not 
allowed for bundles). However, in many cases, those changes don't affect the 
build output as they're change for inside the IDE, not real build control. In 
such cases, versions are bumped without a change in the build output.

If we ignore the .settings/ , then we don't have the need to bump version on 
such changes, and we can update project settings while reusing and reshipping 
the "current" baseline version of the artifact, as long as it's binary 
equivalent. We have some checks in Gerrit and main build to ensure binary 
equivalence when versions are identical. The only possible drawback is that 
some preferences in .settings/ can affect binary output, so by not bumping 
versions, we may see some failure or report of error during the various builds. 
Also the cost is that ironically for all bundles that have a .settings/ change 
as their last commit, it would require to bump their versions once.

 

To me, the later proposal is better as it can participate to the reduction of 
produced versions (less artifact versions == less QE in theory, smaller 
download size for upgrades, optimized disk space on some filesystems...), and I 
think the risk of changing .settings/ that affect the build output is 1. minor 
and 2. already under control by the binary version comparison check.

 

What would be your opinion on this one?


-- 

Mickael Istria

Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/eclipse-packages/>  developer, 
for Red Hat Developers 
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__developers.redhat.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=BbJ1i82pNJnkXoEbqK7sZDkJsrJ7wkY_no7y0H4rMzE&m=oWe8GeYMDFLnMvkYbmCezCS0Q2DckhOelUMwRN8tZc0&s=28bXGeVnurYKeCMOLfUIPteamEylAAbyJyvF4O-dRPQ&e=>
 


_______________________________________________
platform-dev mailing list
platform-dev@eclipse.org
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-dev

Reply via email to