Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of jason.dillon@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.166.181 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:to:x-mailer:from:sender;
        b=fzN9wTKUFSfjBQ7ZCePblxnF2SBJH9ze1nLGQx0fkEgEIw1a3YdosRxDQZsDSxeNxzKGzhNeFTWEb/dULgI5ZR3vbTuA/FaaVww1YPy5ayHyfZ8b80qI7jwzcipn9LQbc3GEqbKl68M+Pz9CS5LVYR4Y+4UKJOSJZRo50r5sPmA=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <50FC8915-E8F8-4A0C-AEEB-BBDCDB33C62D@yahoo.com>
References: <20060630160706.98619.qmail@web31715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <D7E3B089-895C-420E-9CEC-E2D9332691A8@yahoo.com>
 <C8A7D8FE-CFB8-4885-9ED3-78131523A8DB@planet57.com>
 <44A5653D.9060308@apache.org>
 <50FC8915-E8F8-4A0C-AEEB-BBDCDB33C62D@yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <DBB12FEF-4855-459D-9F69-21DC05C59CC2@planet57.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [RTC] - Fix top pom to reference right plugin
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:15:43 -0700
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
From: Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com>
Sender: Jason Dillon <jason.dillon@gmail.com>

>> I think its by coincidence that we have 1.2-SNAPSHOT for both the  
>> plugin
>> and the G codebase...if its not coincidence, then it shouldn't be.
>> IMHO, the plugin should be versioned differently. In fact...I may  
>> even
>> go as far as to say, the packaging plugin can be useful outside of
>> geronimo itself (people building their own packages, etc) and  
>> probably
>> should be in its own tree or even be a mojo.  I am personally against
>> locking the G verison to the plugin version...I would like to see  
>> them
>> seperated.
>
> Can you explain how this could possibly work since the packaging  
> plugin uses geronimo core code to do all its work?  How can it  
> possibly make sense to version something that is a way of running  
> some code in maven differently than the code that is being run?

Short-term I do not believe it can...

And I don't think we should try to resolve this until we have a  
functional m2 build.  After we are up on m2 then we can fix issues  
like this, but I believe it is premature to try to do so now.

--jason