gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <brett.por...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What do we do with "beanutils"?
Date Mon, 08 Nov 2004 23:58:24 GMT
I've been meaning to reply to this in kind.

If a project splits itself into three, should gump really try and map
projects depending on an older version to these? I know you are
experimenting with the latest and greatest, but this might be the
point where you start maintaining beanutils-1.6.x and
beanutils-*-1.7.x in gump and projects can migrate on their own (gump
could encourage those left on the old one to do so, but not require it
to keep running).

- Brett

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:10:14 +0000, robert burrell donkin
<rdonkin@apache.org> wrote:
> (sorry for being a little late to the party)
> 
> 
> 
> On 2 Nov 2004, at 20:18, Brett Porter wrote:
> 
> >>> - projects declare any aliases in their gump descriptor (and Maven
> >>> allows that in the POM so it can generate the descriptor for
> >>> them). So beanutils-core has an alias of beanutils
> >>
> >> I understand the part about projects declaring aliases (we may even
> >> need to do that on the artifact level IMHO).  I don't understand why
> >> Maven needs to know about those at all - other than the Gump plugin,
> >> maybe.
> >
> > I'm thinking of the case where a project name changes, and the aliases
> > are project metadata. I'm not talking about gump names changing - I'm
> > talking about the artifactID changing over time (as was the case with
> > beanutils).
> 
> sadly, beanutils is not so simple.
> 
> the artifact id had to be changed in any case to fit in with the new
> artifact naming conventions (or so it appeared at the time that the
> release was cut) but three artifact ids were always going to be needed:
> two new ones for the modular jar's with simple dependencies and the old
> one for the combined jar. the gump descriptors were tested then
> migrated to commons-beanutils-core (it seemed that no other projects
> used the classes moved into commons-beanutils-collections).
> 
> however, the route of least resistance seems to be for gump to forget
> that the combined distribution exists and use a alias. in any case,
> projects should really be migrating to the new modular jar's (they have
> much simpler dependencies) when they upgrade their dependencies...
> 
> - robert
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org


Mime
View raw message