cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <daniel.k...@iona.com>
Subject Re: version number....
Date Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:23:50 GMT

> Any reason to not define a property like
> <cxf.version>2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT</cxf.version> in the top level
> pom.xml and use that  in all other pom.xml files?

Cause you can't do it.   It won't work properly.

The <version> part of the <parent> needs to be explicitly set so maven can 
FIND the parent pom.xml.   Otherwise, it won't know if the parent is 2.0, 
2.1, etc...

Dan



On Wednesday September 06 2006 1:07 pm, Andrea Smyth wrote:
> Any reason to not define a property like
> <cxf.version>2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT</cxf.version> in the top level
> pom.xml and use that  in all other pom.xml files?
>
> Andrea.
>
> Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >Looks like it's pretty unanimous to go with a 2.0 version number.   I'm
> > going to update the poms to have the version number:
> >
> >2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT
> >
> >I'm also going to update the top level pom's distribution management
> > section to reflect the new incubating repository guidelines at:
> >http://www.apache.org/dev/repository-faq.html
> >
> >Dan
> >
> >On Friday August 25 2006 11:19 am, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >>Right now, the poms all are set to 1.1-SNAPSHOT.   Since we have to
> >> change them, what are people's thoughts on the version number.   Couple
> >> of options:
> >>
> >>1) 1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT  - since it's the first apache version
> >>2) 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT  - since both XFire and Celtix had 1.x
> >> releases 3) Other options?
> >>
> >>I'm kind of leaning toward option (2).    Actually, probably do:
> >> 2.0-incubating-m1-SNAPSHOT
> >>to reflect we're working toward milestone 1.   Then hopefully start
> >>releasing periodic milestones.
> >>
> >>Any thoughts!

-- 
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194   F:781-902-8001
daniel.kulp@iona.com

Mime
View raw message