Mailing-List: contact activemq-dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of chirino@gmail.com designates
 66.249.92.173 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=gpO72BRJvN8eYuCxHn3Ru0CrcydCu8/S5j+rd3DmPBvnCakalwkQMfdVlfBDOel5HmBs724/bebkh+BIY57S2Qg4QOjhbCHaq/iAp8IXCAmaLIHBOKNwvWTmMACCWPtYt3sv5FUVNeWWRw0j/uD5tUPE8mNc+nwwuqxHPm0YV4I=
Message-ID: <af2843cd0611150703i71bc8dd6g8bfd1e75dee2999f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:03:55 -0500
From: "Hiram Chirino" <hiram@hiramchirino.com>
Sender: chirino@gmail.com
To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: ActiveMQ POM
In-Reply-To: <002901c7085a$9b3bb9d0$9cf1a8c0@ncanonizado>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <af2843cd0611140448u330618eah7327838ff24bf0ea@mail.gmail.com>
	 <00f601c7080b$c77b5680$9cf1a8c0@ncanonizado>
	 <b23ecedc0611140845m3f53d86buf906d5480f2574db@mail.gmail.com>
	 <af2843cd0611140852l1bb55719w5187f8a77b6b4097@mail.gmail.com>
	 <002901c7085a$9b3bb9d0$9cf1a8c0@ncanonizado>

I'm actually ok with that.  overwriting old artifacts.  That part the
kinda sucks is that maven won't download updates to those artifacts.

On 11/14/06, Fritz Oconer <foconer@exist.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the downside here is that it will loose reference to previous
> builds. Since "development" will not change to timestamp, then "deploy" will
> just overwrite the existing artifacts.
>
> Regards,
> Fritz
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hiram Chirino" <hiram@hiramchirino.com>
> To: <activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:52 AM
> Subject: Re: ActiveMQ POM
>
>
> > Thanks Fritz!
> >
> > I knew there had to be a reason that I was just not aware of.  What do
> > you think would be the downsides of not using the special "SNAPSHOT"
> > handling that maven provides?  What if we tagged our SNAPSHOT builds
> > with something like like "DEVELOPMENT" instead of "SNAPSHOT".
> >
> > I'm guessing that problem would go away, but what other ones would we get?
> >
> > On 11/14/06, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> This is also my experience.
> >> If we just use the real version 4.2-SNAPSHOT
> >> for example, it should also work and maven
> >> should be able to change (*nearly*) all these
> >> occurrences when using the release plugin.
> >>
> >> I say nearly, because in ServiceMix, there are
> >> some edge cases where this fail (when including
> >> the version in files other than pom.xml like artifacts
> >> resources for example).
> >>
> >> On 11/14/06, Fritz Oconer <foconer@exist.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I added ${activemq-version} instead of ${project.version} basically as
> >> > a
> >> > workaround for build failures due to differences in timestamp. If we
> >> > use
> >> > ${project.version} then it will require all activemq type artifacts
> >> > (specified as <dependency> in the parent pom.xml) to have the same
> >> > timestamp
> >> > as the parent. This becomes an issue when nightly-build deploy fails
> >> > after
> >> > some of the modules have been deployed causing some activemq modules to
> >> > have
> >> > different timestamp as the parent. We can change this back to using
> >> > project.version but we need to make sure that nightly-build always
> >> > deploys
> >> > successfully or I wonder if there is another workaround for this?
> >> >
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-956
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Fritz
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Hiram Chirino" <hiram@hiramchirino.com>
> >> > To: <activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org>
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:48 PM
> >> > Subject: ActiveMQ POM
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Howdy,
> >> > >
> >> > > I was wondering if anybody knows why we are using
> >> > > "${activemq-version}" instead of "${project.version}" in our ActiveMQ
> >> > > poms??  When doing a release build, it's easy to forget that you need
> >> > > to updated the version in to places.  Can't we just use the
> >> > > "${project.version}" variable??
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Hiram
> >> > >
> >> > > Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
> >> Guillaume Nodet
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
> > Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com