geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Geronimo PMC Managed, project-specific Maven Repository
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:59:29 GMT

On Mar 31, 2005, at 8:55 PM, David Jencks wrote:

> for subversion-ized projects I think it makes a lot more sense to use 
> a svn revision number as the jar id than a date.
>
+1
Regards,
Hiram
> david jencks
>
> On Mar 31, 2005, at 5:40 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure why you think we would not use snapshots.  For example, if 
>>>> we were releasing M4, it would have to ship with a SNAPSHOT of 
>>>> activemq 3.0 since it's not ready to be released yet.  We would 
>>>> generate numbered snapshot using the svn revision number of the 
>>>> activemq sources.
>>>
>>> Ah - of other stuff.  I figured there was something missing.
>>>
>>> Interesting question.  Could we ask ActiveMQ to do a 
>>> ActiveMQ-3.0-pre-alpha-don'tuse.jar (or whatever they wanted to call 
>>> it)?  yes, that would be a snapshot, but since it better be a 
>>> functional snapshot (rather than somewhat random), couldn't that be 
>>> a milestone release from ActiveMQ if we asked really, really nicely?
>>>
>>
>> What's the difference between that and me building a 
>> ActiveMQ-3.0-20050115-SNAPSHOT.jar ??  It's the same in my eyes.  The 
>> ActiveMQ folks don't want to keep snapshots like that around since 
>> that just increases the release management overhead.  ActiveMQ likes 
>> to keep it simple... we don't do mile stones or release candidates or 
>> alphas or betas or any of that stuff.
>>
>> I think we just need to be flexible.  Other projects in the future 
>> may not be able to do a release just for a Milestone release of 
>> Geronimo.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hiram
>>
>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
>>> geir@gluecode.com
>>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message