commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: [JJAR] New features
Date Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:22:03 GMT

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 8/12/02 5:18 AM, "Michael Davey" <Michael.Davey@Sun.COM> wrote:
>>Nicola Ken wrote:
>>>If I use the flag that tells JJAR not to get dependencies, and I give a
>>>version, I don't need it, since the filename conversion is enough.
>>>In fact the tag that tells what the jar name is, is redundant, because
>>>in the code you seem to check package and version from the filename...
>>>can't we just remove it and assume that package-version is enough since
>>>we will always have a package-version.jar?
>>I think it should be the other way around.  JJAR should not use the jar name
>>work out the package name and version.  If possible, JJAR should use the
>>Manifest details (Name, Specification-* and Implementation-*).  Failing that,
>>JJAR could use the digest of the Jar file (MD5 or SHA) and look up the package
>>name and version from the repository.
> If it's there.  The idea is that the [distributed] repository is managed, so
> the jar name can be trusted in each case.
> But I like the idea of turning to the manifest as well.

Sorry, I don't get this.
In the code I asw that JJAR *does* look at the Manifets...

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message