Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 72319 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2010 16:33:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 14 Jul 2010 16:33:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 46669 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jul 2010 16:33:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 46536 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jul 2010 16:33:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 46529 invoked by uid 99); 14 Jul 2010 16:33:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:33:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [98.136.44.56] (HELO smtp101.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com) (98.136.44.56) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:33:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 81027 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2010 16:31:55 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer; b=UWDvGBKrfQd3aKylGSl5r7oQIn05TdT8EpbjFMB0hw+xxtNhFz9b+8aNymmJaWHn5Bm9YCjEl9Mt3SqhP+DX6izqVnJ4T35h7D5ZUVzm8wqzrP2ch2VSw+ENPOPyMHBvxQl1Jhr5hwtDs6U4+1vuYSrsiVGnnGgKp3X5MDQwsw8= ; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1279125115; bh=TMEa3mos1swmaDtUxy880uogeuirubL8sZplU9g90yw=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer; b=2p7qSOp5zoszoIWuucWYxUCBciRKpnHh2g40ZZ0gD7lFPQibDsLl0S9/fMexf4XDv5Nc4se1hb0S7oA2pwtF06cF+EO9fMSprBOiW6vZVHJ7GyfbWodD3oMRROr9idObsg7WymD1l6T1CCcElZVz1DeQFh3JPGR7seBx5U18dyo= Received: from [10.0.1.3] (david_jencks@76.76.148.215 with plain) by smtp101.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Jul 2010 09:31:55 -0700 PDT X-Yahoo-SMTP: .9oIUzyswBANsYgUm_5uPui0skTnzGJXJQ-- X-YMail-OSG: 0xQQV0EVM1nGQ.bCsdMX4QOtpxSKkmYcwxDgd5YXngHyXHw qK2fmizTbdBV7pPuYqWcVaao95wOlOdFCORC69jtr.hRZc9jT_8XHUN1NoaO Yz_0ptHz_IA_xBWCgs..oMbV5qzrUDJW4iGSlzbxOWlWkh0TspqVyLDys2yu MkKMMZeduj3AkGcuYX4713ye79pcULK4sd7bCml4LjTjOk3MLkyJTEKUp8wl iTByzW8UsLWu1G4kzbJdcEPwHv4IRn.rRaxWN3512w3.Sgzn8k_Jx0Zt1lEz LvSE17SAT6z72gBiZBOzvSJoUppmg9Xu1VvEWyiHyngZF3F6OcOSK X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Jencks Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-13-170203396 Subject: Re: ${project.version} is a problem.. Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:31:53 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: dev@geronimo.apache.org References: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --Apple-Mail-13-170203396 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Rex Wang wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I suggest we stop using ${project.version} in 3.0's pom. > This maven variable will magicly change when I create a new = sub-project which has it own version. > For example, > When I create a new server assembly "abc" under the assemblies = project, and the abc's pom has it own version 3.0.0.0: > > org.apache.geronimo.assemblies > assemblies > 3.0-M1 > > =20 > c.i.w.assemblies > abc > 3.0.0.0 > server-assembly >=20 > Then, in its effective pom, maven will replace all the = ${project.version} defined in parent pom with 3.0.0.0 >=20 > I think we use ${geronimoVersion} instead and specify geronimoVersion = explicitly in root pom. >=20 > Thoughts? I think this is a really bad idea. In your example above, you should = not have the explicit version 3.0.0.0 Generally, if you want a different version for a particular project, put = the project in a different tree without a file system parent pom. There = are a few special cases like the bundles.... even those probably = shouldn't have a file system parent pom (not actually sure if they do = right now). thanks david jencks >=20 > --=20 > Lei Wang (Rex) > rwonly AT apache.org --Apple-Mail-13-170203396 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Rex Wang wrote:

Hi,

I suggest we stop using ${project.version} in 3.0's pom.
This maven variable will magicly change when I create a new sub-project which has it own version.
For example,
When I create a new server assembly "abc" under the assemblies project, and the abc's pom has it own version 3.0.0.0:
    <parent>
        <groupId>org.apache.geronimo.assemblies</groupId>
        <artifactId>assemblies</artifactId>
        <version>3.0-M1</version>
    </parent>
   
    <groupId>c.i.w.assemblies</groupId>
    <artifactId>abc</artifactId>
    <version>3.0.0.0</version>
    <packaging>server-assembly</packaging>

Then, in its effective pom, maven will replace all the ${project.version} defined in parent pom with 3.0.0.0

I think we use ${geronimoVersion} instead and specify geronimoVersion explicitly in root pom.

Thoughts?

I think this is a really bad idea.  In your example above, you should not have the explicit version <version>3.0.0.0</version>

Generally, if you want a different version for a particular project, put the project in a different tree without a file system parent pom.  There are a few special cases like the bundles.... even those probably shouldn't have a file system parent pom (not actually sure if they do right now).

thanks
david jencks


--
Lei Wang (Rex)
rwonly AT apache.org

--Apple-Mail-13-170203396--