[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Equinox Bundle Version Concerns
|
On 25 Mar 2015, at 14:06, Ed Merks wrote:
Max,
That would definitely help in some cases, but many cases are service
level related. Of course that's always the case for service releases,
and with the common/recommended practice of +100 service level
increments it's a very common problem. I believe that Tycho can/does
support qualifier expansion based on git commits, so it's certainly
possible in principle to know there was a commit in a bundle and that
there has been no commit to the MANIFEST.MF, i.e., one could write a
fairly brute force tool. The problem is that not every file in the
bundle necessarily results in changes to in the binary version of the
bundle (e.g., a .gitignore change) so there could be false alerts,
which is why our plugin check simply asserts that between a release and
the next there must be a bump if the binary changed. I don't really care
if you just added a .gitignore - your build has then changed and you are
producing new bits :)
I know its brute force but I find it better than having multiple
different binaries with the same version released unwillingly.
nor does this help with feature maintenance without deeper dependency
analysis. In the end it's really a very hard and nasty problem so no
one should take offense to my pointing out the platform's problems.
I'm quite sure we're pretty much all are making such mistakes and will
continue to do so, unless we use tools...
/max
Regards,
Ed
On 25/03/2015 12:17 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
We've contributed a plugin to tycho that fails build if the version
number is unchanged between build and a baseline.
Maybe enable that in I builds to catch the very basic failures ? (It
has much less overhead than full Api tools)
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
On 25 Mar 2015, at 12:02, Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Dani,
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=463077
My general concern is that version increment oversights seem to be a
general pattern which isn't surprising because it's hard to know
whenever you commit something if that's the first commit for the
current stream and therefore requires a version increment. Further
more, there are ripple effects, i.e., the increment for a
feature.xml is most often dictated indirectly by the largest
increment in any included bundle or feature, and again, it's hard to
know whether this has been done yet for the current stream. It
might even be the case that a service increment has been made
already, but a subsequent more significant change dictates
incrementing the minor version (or major version) instead, and then
that ripples up to all the including features and their including
features. In the case of the platform, such including features are
often in a different repository (and I know that there isn't really
anyone who does more than check out the projects for their local
area of interest).
I don't know how a human being can be expected to maintain this
level of complexity consistently and correctly. I know I'm
certainly not capable of that, so I use Oomph's version tool for EMF
to manage the bundle/feature service versions. I know API tools help
with major and minor versions, but even here either those tools
aren't being used or aren't diagnosing these problems properly (and
clearly can't do the job if no one is checking out the broader
source base). In any case, the tools themselves require attention
and maintenance (and documentation), i.e., setting up proper
baselines and checking out containing features, so that's
significant work as well. Not to mention the fact that in the case
of API tools, the impact on build time is, let's just say,
prohibitive to the point of wanting to turn it off most of the time.
Regards,
Ed
On 25/03/2015 10:07 AM, Daniel Megert wrote:
Hi Ed
You're right, the *minor* version needs to be increased when the
BREE is changed as per
_https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering#When_to_change_the_minor_segment_.
Please file bugs if you see outdated bundle versions.
Dani
From: Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 24.03.2015 18:57
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Equinox Bundle Version Concerns
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Eike and I have been trying to address problems in Oomph related to
the Mars Mac App layout changes and we're concerned that there
appears to be a general problem with a lack of semantic version
changes in bundles that have modified contents, in many cases not
just very minor content changes but rather major behavioral
changes. For example, it's clear that the p2 eclipse publisher is
significantly changed by this commit:
_http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/commit/?id=1b96ce896c49151b0e20fa49ba680d08415cca8f_
In fact, this commit changed the MANIFEST.MF of the eclipse
publisher itself:
_http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/diff/bundles/org.eclipse.equinox.p2.publisher.eclipse/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF?id=1b96ce896c49151b0e20fa49ba680d08415cca8f_
I.e., it is changing the BREE but it does not change the version
number of the MANIFEST.MF.
The last time the semantic version of this MANIFEST.MF was changed
was by this commit:
_http://git.eclipse.org/c/equinox/rt.equinox.p2.git/commit/?id=c847dee6f33950f48ecd1d8eca18729f6ffc470f_
I.e., way back for Kepler. The versioning guidelines are pretty
clear that a content change requires at least a service increment:
_https://wiki.eclipse.org/Version_Numbering#When_to_change_the_service_segment_
I've not investigated more deeply, but my impression is that there
is a general pattern of forgetting to increment bundle versions
when the contents have changed. Comparing Mars M6 (left) with
Luna SR2 (right) I see very few things have been incremented, but
surely there have been many changes.
Note the red outlined case where the Mars version actually has a
smaller version number, 3.9.0, than the Luna version on the right,
3.9.1. That's very wrong.
I hesitate to point out that Oomph has a version management tool
for detecting when version changes don't match up with content
changes. I know other teams regularly increment all versions at
the start of a release, which granted is not ideal. But failing
that, it's a difficult problematic to manage manually such changes
and it's clear that it's not being handled very well because this
isn't the first time during the release cycle that this issue has
come up for the platform...
In case you're wondering, we're particularly concerned about this
because in Oomph we'll need to detect whether we're installing a
product with a newer or older version of the bundles that support
the new versus the old layout. We're not even sure which
representative bundle's version test though it seems clear we must
not be relying just on a build qualifier change to test for
content/behavior changes. For us it would be ideal if these things
were properly incremented for the final M6 repository contents...
Regards,
Ed[attachment "abhceiej.png" deleted by Daniel Megert/Zurich/IBM]
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
