Proposal: mandatory versioning metadata for modules

[Alan Bateman]

On 04/11/2012 12:01, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * David Jorm:
>
>> The problem here is "optional" version number. What I'm trying to
>> achieve is mandatory minimal version metadata.
> I don't think we'll change version numbers in security updates (just
> like we don't change sonames and other identifiers), so I'm not
> convinced this will work.
Who is "we"? At least for the JDK then the version number is rev'ed at 
each update, including security updates. Whether individual JDK modules 
are rev'ed or all modules are rev'ed at the same time is something for 
further down the road. However you are right that if modules have very 
tight constraints then it will be a problem, particularly if modules 
that have security issues are back-listed from being used.

-Alan.