commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: [Math] Name vs "artefactId" (Was: [jira] [Commented] (MATH-1057) ...)
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:46:59 GMT
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:15:16 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 1/20/14, 6:40 AM, sebb wrote:
>> On 20 January 2014 13:18, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> 
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:14:21 +0000 (UTC), Emmanuel Bourg (JIRA) 
>>> wrote:
>>>> [
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1057?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13876346#comment-13876346
>>>> ]
>>>>
>>>> Emmanuel Bourg commented on MATH-1057:
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> It might be a good idea to rename the source archive for the next
>>>> releases to commons-math-3.x-bin.tar.gz, that's indeed confusing.
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> But IIUC, the filename comes from the POM's "artefactId" (which 
>>> must be
>>> updated according to the TL package's name).
>>> [So I guess that the parent POM must be modified so as to be able 
>>> to
>>> create a filename based on another variable (?).]
>> Try something like:
>>
>> <artifactId>maven-assembly-plugin</artifactId>
>>             <executions>
>>               <execution>
>>                 <configuration>
>>                     
>> <finalName>commons-math-3-${project.version}</finalName>
>
> If we do go this route, I would favor commons-math-3.x (i.e. toss
> the -3- above); but I am ambivalent on this change.  It breaks
> standardization in artifact names to make it less likely someone
> looking at a tarball will mistake it for something it is not.  I
> doubt we would consider making such a change in the jar name itself,
> so I wonder if this really makes sense.
>

It's a convention; the "component" part could be the component's name
i.e. Commons Math could give "commons-math" as a base name; then the
artefacts (archives and JAR files) would be differentiated solely on
the version number:
   commons-math-3.3.tar.gz
   commons-math-3.3.jar

The current convention seems that the base name is derived from the
top-level package name (which could indeed be mildly confusing, hence
this thread):
   commons-math3-3.3.jar

But since the top-level package is renamed with each major version, it
is redundant to have the major number present both in the name and in
the version number.


Gilles


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


Mime
View raw message