Re: [p2-dev] p2 bundle versions

[Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

One thing to keep in mind is the difference between an implementer of some API and a client of it. I am not sure if this is the case you mention below but if one bundle is implementing an interface defined in another bundle then a more tightly bound version range may be needed to ensure new methods are not added to the interface being implemented.

Tom



Ian Bull ---07/12/2010 03:19:08 PM---As part of the work I did on [1], I added a new method to the MetadataFactory. Since this class is API, I've up'd the version n

From:	Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:	P2 developer discussions <p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	07/12/2010 03:19 PM
Subject:	[p2-dev] p2 bundle versions

---

As part of the work I did on [1], I added a new method to the MetadataFactory. Since this class is API, I've up'd the version number (to 2.1.0) and added the @since tag to the new method. However, the engine had requiredBundle dependency on the metadata with a pretty strict dependency [2.0.0, 2.1.0).  I'm not sure we need the range this tight.  I've opened it up a bit more [2.0.0, 2.2.0) and increased the version of the engine to 2.0.1.  

[1] 279015: Support update descriptor advice in p2.inf
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=279015

So I have a few questions:
1. Is that the right approach?
2. Can we open up the engine even more, say [2.0.0, 3.0.0), or is there a reason for the tight range?

cheers,
ian

-- 
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev