You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> on 2006/12/16 01:23:57 UTC

schema versioning question

I discovered a mistake in geronimo-naming-1.2.xsd related to jpa  
support and I'm wondering where to fix it.

The pending 1.2-beta and 2.0-M1 releases are the first publication of  
geronimo-naming-1.2.

Assuming that the release votes pass on these artifacts, should I fix  
the schema and leave the version at 1.2 and fix 1.2 and 2.0-M1 and  
2.0 (trunk) to all work with the new schema or should I move to  
geronimo-naming-2.0.xsd and fix it only in trunk?

thanks
david jencks

Re: schema versioning question

Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Leaving 2.0-M1 as is...I'm working on cutting the release.  At this  
point change is bad.

On Dec 17, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:

>
> On Dec 15, 2006, at 7:23 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> I discovered a mistake in geronimo-naming-1.2.xsd related to jpa  
>> support and I'm wondering where to fix it.
>>
>> The pending 1.2-beta and 2.0-M1 releases are the first publication  
>> of geronimo-naming-1.2.
>>
>> Assuming that the release votes pass on these artifacts, should I  
>> fix the schema and leave the version at 1.2 and fix 1.2 and 2.0-M1  
>> and 2.0 (trunk) to all work with the new schema or should I move  
>> to geronimo-naming-2.0.xsd and fix it only in trunk?
>
> I think it should be fixed in branches/1.2 and trunk.
>
> Depending on where Matt is in preparation for 2.0-M1, it could  
> optionally go into branches/1.0-M1. However, I think it's fine if  
> 2.0-M1 doesn't contain the update...
>
> --kevan
>

Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org

Re: schema versioning question

Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 15, 2006, at 7:23 PM, David Jencks wrote:

> I discovered a mistake in geronimo-naming-1.2.xsd related to jpa  
> support and I'm wondering where to fix it.
>
> The pending 1.2-beta and 2.0-M1 releases are the first publication  
> of geronimo-naming-1.2.
>
> Assuming that the release votes pass on these artifacts, should I  
> fix the schema and leave the version at 1.2 and fix 1.2 and 2.0-M1  
> and 2.0 (trunk) to all work with the new schema or should I move to  
> geronimo-naming-2.0.xsd and fix it only in trunk?

I think it should be fixed in branches/1.2 and trunk.

Depending on where Matt is in preparation for 2.0-M1, it could  
optionally go into branches/1.0-M1. However, I think it's fine if 2.0- 
M1 doesn't contain the update...

--kevan