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: [VOTE] Accept the package name/artifactId guideline as a "rule"...
Date Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:54:55 GMT
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 7:43 PM, James Carman
<james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Ralph Goers
> <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>
>> I disagree. The "rule" should be that a new package and artifactId is required when
compatibility is broken, not when a version change occurs. Exceptions should be based on that
policy, not on a version change occurs.
>>
>
> Ok, so how about we change the rule?  We could say "if the binary
> compatibility is broken, then the package/artifactId must change."
> Again, this rule can be broken if a component feels they need to do so
> and they provide a very good reason. :)

How about "if a component decides on a package rename, then the maven
artifactId must change"?

If a component breaks binary compatibility and chooses not to do a
package rename then changing the maven artifact doesn't help in any
way and will just mean additoinal pom config might be required to
exclude the old artifact.

Niall

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


Mime
View raw message