commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carlos Sanchez" <>
Subject Re: m2 groupIds
Date Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:41:23 GMT
yep, but to be clear, if we had relocated that version it'd
potentially break people using it as their binary would change.
I wouldn't like you to think that I screwed you for any reason.
FWIW i'm not fan of relocations anyway, they have potentially bad
effects. If an artifact moves to other place the user needs to change
it by himself if he wants to upgrade. Not any different if an project
changes omain and you have to go to the new one to download it.

On 2/14/07, Jörg Schaible <> wrote:
> Carlos Sanchez wrote on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 8:40 AM:
> > iirc you have very different jars in the two groupids, that's not
> > relocation, that would actually change the binaries for users
> This was for one single release only (because we did not realize, that the M1 and M2
repos are "completed" automatically with the missing artifacts), but not for all the old releases
where I also adjusted the POMs with the relocation section. Nevermind it is history now, but
the complete discussion shows, that the process is still not clear and that there's no optimal
solution either.
> - Jörg
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
                             -- The Princess Bride

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

View raw message