|
Re: Confused about 3.0 and 2.x releases [message #57447 is a reply to message #57421] |
Sat, 14 June 2003 12:27 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: adam.kiezun.gmx.net.remove
M2003.... builds are on the 2.1 branch
I2003.... builds are on the 3.0 branch
so yes,
I20030611 > M1 (they're both on the same branch and I20030611 is newer)
but no I20030611 is _not_ > M20030611 (it's a different branch)
i think it was explained on the platform newsgroup a number of times
a.
--
eclipse.org
|
|
|
|
Re: Confused about 3.0 and 2.x releases [message #57691 is a reply to message #57421] |
Sun, 15 June 2003 04:08 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: bob.objfac.com
One of these is a 2.1.1 build and the other is a 3.0 build. 3.0 won't
supersede 2.1.x until the final 3.0 release, and it may never be quite the
same, API- or feature-wise.
I am aware it is just spitting into the wind, but I caution early adopters
to be prepared to fall back to a 2.1 release if they want to keep working.
This is a concern for any release cycle, but the 3.0 release is special. In
addition to the usual milestone breakage, the API is intentionally changing.
There will be no guarantee that any third-party plug-in (i.e., one not
shipped as part of Eclipse) will run in any 3.0 build. Third parties get no
advance warning of changes; assuming their plug-ins still compile, they
usually find out about changes when their users report bugs. It will be a
constant game of catch-up all this year and into the next.
For plug-in writers, the caution is somewhat different. When Eclipse
branches, it is a _really_ good idea if third-party plug-ins branch at the
same time. I learned this the hard way through the 2.1 cycle, a "compatible"
release. ;-}
Bob
"Channing Walton" <channingwalton@mac.com> wrote in message
news:bcesr4$ott$1@rogue.oti.com...
> Hi,
> Does the I20030611 release supercede the M1 release or just the M20030611
> release?
>
> Sorry if this is written somewhere but I've looked around for such info.
>
> Confused,
>
> Channing
>
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04053 seconds