beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carlin Rogers" <carlin.rog...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: question about schema changes and versioning
Date Tue, 15 May 2007 15:57:23 GMT
Hi Beehive devs,

Just checking again to see if there were any thoughts or
recommendations as far as adding an element to the Beehive
url-template-config schema and versioning.

If there are no issues, then I'll plan to just add the new element.

Thanks,
Carlin

On 5/2/07, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have some questions about how Beehive development should handle
> versioning for a schema change.
>
> Background... I've come across a scenario for creating snippets of
> templates that may not have all the required tokens as defined in the
> TemplatedURLFormatter class for the template support in NetUI URL
> rewriting. But rather than have a developer provide an extension to
> TemplatedURLFormatter and override the set of required tokens for all
> templates in the web app, the desired enhancement would be to have an
> optional flag on a template by template basis in
> beehive-url-template-config.xml to be able to basically say it doesn't
> need to validate against required tokens.
>
> A change like this would imply a change to the
> url-template-config.xsd. It would extend the namespace (e.g., by
> adding a new optional element in the <url-template>), but does not
> invalidate previously valid documents.
>
> What would be the process for a schema update as far as versioning?
>
> Currently the url-template-config.xsd does not have the optional
> version attribute at the start of our XML schema. Should we start by
> adding it and bump it up with the next release? Then existing instance
> documents would not have to change as they would remain valid with the
> new version since it is just an optional additive change. Do we even
> need to do that? Or would there need to be a different approach such
> as changing the schema's targetNamespace? If so, how should it be
> versioned, especially for minor changes? ...just trying to determine
> the best way to do this for an optional, additive change like this.
>
> Would appreciate any thoughts on this.
>
> Kind regards,
> Carlin
>

Mime
View raw message