commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: import * vs explicit debate
Date Thu, 03 Apr 2003 18:13:07 GMT

On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology wrote:

> But the Maven/Gump procedure is messing with that scenario a bit.  Are
> you saying that it promotes *automatic* updates of all clients when a
> library is updated?  In that world, Alphonse does not exist; he is
> replaced by a script (or just an automatic Ant-based web download).

Yep. One aspect of Maven [it's optional] is that all our projects build at
midnight, a SNAPSHOT version is created and anyone who builds a project
the next day is likely to get that new version [assuming they're working
on something which has declared itself to use the SNAPSHOT].

I think it's probably better to be doing lots and lots of micro-versions,
but that seems to cost a lot in terms of upgrading the version each module
depends upon. The SNAPSHOT methodology is easier to work with and makes it
break earlier rather than later.

I imagine there's probably some big academic philosophical argument out
there somewhere about whether breaking earlier is better or worse than
breaking later.

> This scenario is a little troubling, since it introduces the
> possibility of semantic changes as well as syntactic ones.  This
> transcends the import issue.  If this is so, is there a rationale for
> it somewhere I can read up on?
> Note that I actually think this procedure is great, and can accelerate
> development, as long as everyone involved understands the risks.

Yeah, pretty much my view. Day to day is great, but every now and then the
development-train crashes and we have to unravel pecularities.


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

View raw message