geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <joe.b...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: Dependencies on jars in 1.1 and beyond
Date Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:06:57 GMT
Yes, I agree that the assumption would be a non-versioned jar would be 
considered version 0.0.   But I haven't thought of a way yet to support 
both versioned and unversioned jars when calling out the dependency 
without a schema change.

For example, suppose the repo contains both mattsjar.jar and 
mattsjar-1.0.jar.  If I want the latest version of a jar in Geronimo 1.1 
I just omit the version number from the dependency.  No version number = 
the latest version number.  So, that means that we can't use the lack of 
a version number to mean we have a dependency on the unversioned jar. 
Short of a change in the schema, I'm not sure how to support both 
versioned and unversioned jars with an optional version element.

I hate to open this issue up again now .... but I think we need to 
consider this if we want to support unversioned jars (which I think 
would make the life a bit easier for our users).

Joe


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I think an implicit Version of 0.0 might be reasonable for jars that do 
> not follow Maven conventions.  Personally I think forcing everyone to 
> rename their jars is a bit intrusive as not everyone would want / need 
> to do this.
> 
> How about this:
> 
> mattsjar.jar would be implicitly mattsjar-0.0.jar without the usewr 
> having to change a thing.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Matt
> 
> Joe Bohn wrote:
> 
>>
>> I have a situation where I need to make several web modules dependent 
>> upon a large number of jars.  I'd like to add the jars to the Geronimo 
>> repo and add the dependencies into the plans for the web modules. 
>> However, most of the jars don't follow the maven naming convention 
>> because the names don't include a version (and I'd rather not rename 
>> all the jars).
>>
>> I know that there are changes being included in 1.1 to make the 
>> version in a reference optional.  However, I doubt that it is possible 
>> to reference a jar in the repo that doesn't contain any version.  Just 
>> thought I should ask in case it really is possible.  I could see where 
>> this might be something users would like when they have picked up jars 
>> from various places which may or may not contain a version in the jar 
>> name.
>>
>> If it *is* possible to have a non-versioned jar in the repo ... how do 
>> we differentiate in geronimo 1.1 between a dependency on a 
>> non-versioned jar versus a dependency on the latest version of a jar 
>> (in case both are present).
>>
>> Thanks for the help,
>> Joe
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn at earthlink.net

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot 
lose."   -- Jim Elliot

Mime
View raw message