Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename versionRange attribute to compatibilityRange #968

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

htztomic
Copy link
Contributor

@htztomic htztomic commented Jul 30, 2019

This is a fix to GitHub issue #418. The versionRange attribute has been renamed to compatibilityRange.

@htztomic htztomic force-pushed the gh-418 branch 2 times, most recently from 305ed5d to c23860a Compare July 31, 2019 00:43
Copy link
Contributor

@snicoll snicoll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR. LGTM in general with the following suggestions:

  • I don't think the low-level should be renamed. It represents a VersionRange so the current name sounds fine to me
  • I am not keen to introduce a v2.2 of the metadata at this point.

Let me know what you think, thanks!

@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
*
* @author Stephane Nicoll
*/
public class VersionRange {
public class CompatibilityRange {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we should rename the low-level object type. It does represent a version range and the purpose of this task is to requalify a particular use of it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed upon keeping VersionRange as the underlying name as it does represent a range of the low level object Version.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FTR, there is actually right now another use of VersionRange, see OnGradleVersionCondition.

*
* @author HaiTao Zhang
*/
public class InitializrMetadataV22JsonMapper extends InitializrMetadataV21JsonMapper {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we are ready to introduce 2.2 yet. This change should be part of V3

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed upon grouping multiple changes to V3 instead of having a V2.2 of the InitializrMetadataJsonMapper.

pom.xml Outdated
@@ -361,9 +361,9 @@
<artifactId>
maven-checkstyle-plugin
</artifactId>
<versionRange>
<compatibilityRange>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was a too agressive search and replace here.

@snicoll snicoll added the status: waiting-for-feedback We need additional information before we can continue label Aug 2, 2019
@snicoll snicoll mentioned this pull request Aug 2, 2019
@htztomic htztomic force-pushed the gh-418 branch 2 times, most recently from 70fc278 to 1384ae2 Compare August 5, 2019 21:12
@snicoll snicoll added type: enhancement and removed status: waiting-for-feedback We need additional information before we can continue labels Aug 9, 2019
@snicoll snicoll self-assigned this Aug 9, 2019
@snicoll snicoll added this to the 0.8.0 milestone Aug 9, 2019
snicoll pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2019
@snicoll snicoll closed this in 7ffcd17 Aug 9, 2019
@snicoll
Copy link
Contributor

snicoll commented Aug 9, 2019

@htztomic well done, thank you very much!

snicoll added a commit to spring-io/start.spring.io that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants