commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [dbcp] 1.3 release packaging - take two
Date Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:32:31 GMT
I think Niall has good counterpoints. I think his point is summed up with:

* Keep same groupId
* Keep same artifactId
* Keep same version
* Different classifiers are appropriate.

If so, I am +1 with it.

Paul

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Niall Pemberton
<niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
>> Phil,
>>
>> I don't think you should be modifying the version (and groups, really)
>> here. All the artifacts belong to version 1.3.
>>
>> Maven does have a concept of a qualifier, but according to Sonatype,
>> it's only to capture milestone builds:
>> http://www.sonatype.com/books/maven-book/reference/pom-relationships-sect-pom-syntax.html
>
> I don't think this is true maven has used "classifier" to distribute
> various artifacts that are attached to the project - such as
> "sources", "javadocs", test jar and it talks about them here in the
> same book
>
> http://www.sonatype.com/books/maven-book/reference/assemblies-sect-output-algorithm.html#assemblies-sect-transitive
>
> Also its been a fairly common pratice with many projects using a maven
> build to provide JDK 1.4 compatible jars after the project moved to
> JDK 1.5 using some kind of classifier - this is pretty much the same
> situation.
>
> If you use a different artifactId for the different jars then its
> going to be a bigger PITA for the release - since you'll need a pom
> and have to update maven-metadata.xml - probably anually. This is what
> happened in BeanUtils and doing a release is much more painful and
> prone to errors.
>
> I would go down the classifer route.
>
> Niall
>
>> What you have, simply, is, different artifacts. Keep the same groupId
>> and version, just alter the artifact names.
>>
>> JDBC 4 version (JDK 1.6)
>> groupId = org.apache.commons
>> artifactId = commons-dbcp
>> version = 1.3
>>
>> JDBC 3 version (JDK 1.4-1.5)
>> groupId = org.apache.commons
>> artifactId = commons-dbcp-jdbc3
>> version = 1.3
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>> I am about to roll an RC and I need to make sure all are OK with the
>>>>  artifact names and repo placement
>>>>
>>>> JDBC 4 version (JDK 1.6)
>>>> groupId org.apache.maven
>>>
>>> Oops! I obviously mean commons above :)
>>>> artifactID commons-dbcp
>>>> version 1.3
>>>>
>>>> JDBC 3 version (JDK 1.4-1.5)
>>>> groupId commons-dbcp
>>>> artifactId commons-dbcp
>>>> version 1.3-jdbc3
>>>>
>>>> Giving the 1.3 name to the 1.6 version makes sense as this is the
>>>> main development version.  Moving it gets it into compliance with
>>>> the maven standard and avoids unintended consequences of upgrading
>>>> for 1.4-1.5 users by requiring a bigger change.
>>>>
>>>> Alternatively, we could put descriptors on both and leave placement
>>>> as is. Opinions please.
>>>>
>>>> Phil
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message