commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [IO] Next version of IO - should this be 2.0?
Date Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:45:14 GMT
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Dennis Lundberg <dennisl@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2010-03-07 12:41, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:15 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The trunk pom.xml refers to 1.5-SNAPSHOT, but it seems to me that the
>>> next release should be 2.0 rather 1.5, as IO now requires Java 1.5,
>>> that requires a major version change.
>>
>> The plan was to release it as 2.0 - but IMO its not a requirement.
>>
>>
>>> Does that make sense?
>>> If so, then the maven id can also be fixed (see IO-125).
>>
>> -1 - see comments on JIRA ticket
>
> We need to make this switch sooner rather than later. Currently every
> release with a groupId och commons-* requires manual work from the
> people who manage Maven central repository. We're just about the only
> Apache project left not using a groupId of org.apache.*.

I thought it was only when we did the first m2 release for a component
and not for subsequent m2 releases for the group. Is that not the
case?

> We have previously said that we should make the switch to a groupId of
> org.apache.commons when we do a major release. IMO we need to stick by
> that decision.

I don't remember that decision, do you have a link to the thread? Even
if we did - this is going to cause problems for users who change their
dependency to the latest - but also depend on other artifacts that
have an older dependency on commons-io. Is this user pain worth it?

Niall

>> Niall

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


Mime
View raw message