On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Markus Karg <markus.karg_at_gmx.net> wrote:
> Tatu,
>
>> Yes, when you know meaning of versions. But no, since you can not
>> forecast in advance what the semantics are (not even necessarily for
>
> This is not true. The sense of a version schema is to provide the
> availability of forecasts. If one follows the Maven 2 best practices, then
> any API change will result in either major or minor change, while all bug
> fixes will not advance major nor minor but only bugfix or build parts. So
> this IS predictable.
You must have misunderstood what I was trying to say.
You said that you would use, say "all version between 2.0 and 4.x" are fine.
I assume this would be done at time when only version 2.0 is
available. That is the thing I claim is wrong. You would never want to
define such a dependency.
As per your own statements wrt. Maven this would seem unfounded and
wrong -- how could you possibly know that version 3.0 has a drastic
change that does not break your depending thing.
Yet, hey, it is certainly possibly it would not break the dependency.
But you CAN NOT know this in advance. No amount of contracts,
conventions or wishful thinking changes that.
Version numbering is essentially conservative, so you will not
underestimate amount of disruption. You may overestimate it.
As to rest of comments, we are obviously talking past each other -- I
do not understand how you are reading my comments, nor how you get to
your conclusions. I have no idea if we might agree or not.
I think discussion has essentially expired. :-)
-+ Tatu +-