Re: Re [Springframework-developer] DTD versioning

[Colin S. <col...@ex...>]

I am ok with either one. I picked the variant I did before because it is 
what Sun uses, but if somebody likes the Hibernate-style better I am ok 
with that.

jürgen höller [werk3AT] wrote:

>Any opinions on the exact naming of the DTD file? I'd like to commit the change promptly :-)
> 
>Juergen
> 
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: spr...@li... im Auftrag von jürgen höller [werk3AT]
>Gesendet: Mo 16.02.2004 08:40
>An: spr...@li...
>Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] DTD versioning
>
>
>
>Colin, Rod,
>
>I've just adapted BeansDtdResolver to fall back to the default DTD file "spring-beans_1_0.dtd" if  "spring-beans.dtd" was specified, issuing a corresponding message at INFO level (not committed yet). I guess INFO is appropriate, as "spring-beans" can simply be considered a shortcut for "spring-beans_1_0" for the time being.
>
>If we agree on the exact naming that Colin proposed, I'll commit this and adapt all our bean definition declarations in the samples etc. The only alternative that I see is "spring-beans-1.0.dtd" as used by Hibernate's DTDs, while "_1_0" is the style used by Sun's DTDs.
>
>IMO, "spring-beans.dtd" should also stay available from the website, simply adding the versioned DTD file there.
>
>Juergen
>
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: spr...@li... im Auftrag von Rod Johnson
>Gesendet: So 15.02.2004 17:18
>An: spr...@li...
>Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] DTD versioning
>
>
>
>Colin
>
>I agree about versioning, so long as we can avoid breaking people's
>definitions. We could have only the new URL on the web site and modify the
>entity resolver so that it produces a log warning on finding the old one
>(but still resolved it). This should provide a deprecation-style upgrade
>path.
>
>Regards,
>Rod
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Colin Sampaleanu" <col...@ex...>
>To: <spr...@li...>
>Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 3:26 PM
>Subject: [Springframework-developer] DTD versioning
>
>
>  
>
>>I updated the DTD on the website, and this reminds me that we should
>>version the document. I propose naming it something like
>>
>>spring-beans_1_0.dtd
>>
>>with the doctype definition being:
>>
>><!DOCTYPE beans PUBLIC "-//SPRING//DTD BEAN 1.0//EN"
>>        "http://www.springframework.org/dtd/spring-beans_1_0.dtd">
>>
>>If everyone is in agreement, the only question is if we should keep the
>>old one around (ie keep both versions) for the 1.0 release. I would
>>favour having only the new version, to avoid future confusion, although
>>this would force everybody to update their definition documents.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Colin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
>>Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
>>a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click
>>_______________________________________________
>>Springframework-developer mailing list
>>Spr...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
>Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
>a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Springframework-developer mailing list
>Spr...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
>
>  
>