geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Geronimo PMC Managed, project-specific Maven Repository
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:40:24 GMT
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:35:26PM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> 
> On Mar 31, 2005, at 6:30 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> >>>
> >>>It could.  But the main argument to keep old numbered snapshot jars 
> >>>is so that you can build an old source release of of geronimo that 
> >>>might depend on a old numbered snapshot release.
> >>
> >>How?  do we ever list the snapshot number in project.xml?
> >
> >I think for a release, yes..  we should take the effort and specify 
> >the snapshot number.
> 
> I'm confused, and want to make sure we're not just talking past each 
> other accidentally.  For a release, we don't use snapshots anyway, 
> right?  We'd generate a set of jars all with the release version number 
> in the filename.
> 

A little.  True maven SNAPSHOTs are timestamped jars, not just jars
whose version number happens to include the word SNAPSHOT.

We don't actually use the jar:deploy-snapshot maven goal, which in
fact does give you a timestamped (e.g. numbered) binary like
geronimo-kernel-20050331044923.jar.  Then it just symlinks that file
to geronimo-kernel-SNAPSHOT.jar.  So the "SNAPSHOT" is just a symlink
to the timestamped jar.  Provided you checked out before you built and
deployed the maven-created snapshot jars, you have a pretty decent way
to find the source for the jar in cvs.

Would be great if we could use it, but we can't because it generates
the timestamp on a per-module basis and you end up with this:

  geronimo-kernel-20050331044923.jar
  geronimo-common-20050331045056.jar
  geronimo-system-20050331045514.jar
  geronimo-deployment-20050331045732.jar
  geronimo-j2ee-20050331050124.jar
  geronimo-j2ee-schema-20050331050659.jar
  (etc ...)

I think what Hiram has in his head is that for M1 and M2 he cut an
ActiveMQ release and we released against those.  For M3, they were
still waiting on a couple non-geronimo related features to do a
release, so we created a YYYYMMDD stamped copy of the ActiveMQ
snapshots we were using and released against those.  So if those jars
have been deleted from the ActiveMQ repo, M3 is not buildable by
anyone.

Our XFire dependencies are a cvs version hand datestamped as well as
we didn't want a SNAPSHOT dependency because the code just changes too
fast being they are still in early development--lots of renaming,
repackaging and other refactoring.  As with ActiveMQ, that XFire
version is in their repo and is safe as long as no one over there
forgets we need it.


-David

Mime
View raw message