[jsr361-experts] Re: [jsr361-observers] Re: Re: Version numbering for MEEP
- From: Werner Keil <
- Subject: [jsr361-experts] Re: [jsr361-observers] Re: Re: Version numbering for MEEP
- Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:35:21 +0200
There is however an inconsistency between SE 8 (its JSR also says "Java SE
) take a newly introduced class like
Clock where JavaDoc says since 1.8
and how we (most EG Members are in both JSRs, so "we" sounds like a safe
bet here) handle this for CLDC 8 (1.8)
Is that on purpose?
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Volker Bauche
> We have to differ between:
> Platform level name: CLDC 8
> Spec: CLDC 8
> Configuration version: CLDC-1.8.0
> microedition.configuration: CLDC-1.8
> So we have at least as the name of the spec and also to be used in
> javadocs etc.
> "CLDC 8" and "MEEP 8" which is good and consistent.
> Am 05.08.2013 11:24, schrieb Werner Keil:
> Well at the moment it simply says "CLDC 8" in JavaDocs e.g. of the
> previews. Given the code-base uses things introduced in Java 8 or earlier,
> a simple "1.8" or so could be confusing. Good question is, whether CLDC's
> internal version number is 8.0.0 or 1.8.0 like the SE equivalent (also for
> some applications which may run on both, I recall some Eclipse projects
> running into trouble when ICU4J changed and the 50.x+ versions went into
> this year's Kepler release train[?])
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Lampart Thomas <
>> Hi Volker, experts,
>> Looks much better to me.
>> Only one question: What will be the version numbers for the related CLDC ?
>> Will it be "CLDC 8" and "CLDC-8.0.0" then ? Which would be good.
>> Or will it still be "CLDC-1.8.0" ?
>> Kind regards
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Sent: Montag, 5. August 2013 11:11
>> Subject: [jsr361-experts] Version numbering for MEEP
>> Dear experts,
>> coming back to my action item about need to improve the something
>> confusing version numbering for MEEP in the current draft of the spec, I
>> have discussed this with ME8 archtects and reflected our discussion during
>> the call last week.
>> The outcome proposal is to have the following, much more consistent
>> version numbers now:
>> Platform-level name: "MEEP 8"
>> Spec: "MEEP-8"
>> Profile version: "MEEP-8.0.0"
>> microedition.profile value: "MEEP-8.0"
>> I think this is the variant matching our ideas raised during the call
>> best:: everything is "8", no confusion between "8" and "1.x".
>> Pls. let me know if you like this solution, then I can fix this in the
>> next (and PR) draft version.
>> Thanks -
Description: GIF image