lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <>
Subject Re: two versioning problems with Lucene
Date Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:53:20 GMT
On Dec 7, 2004, at 7:42 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> So if we keep the Lucene version in only the packaging of the jar
> file, we have a source of end-user error and fragility in two ways:
> (1) the manifest file may not be available (the class files may be
> re-packaged in another app which didn't know to copy the Lucene
> manifest stuff, or unpacked)

I'd like to hear others weigh in on this repackaging issue.  Is this a 
common practice?

Supporting users that repackage the JAR and potentially introduce 
incompatibilities will not be fun, and if someone reports they are 
running Lucene 1.5.3 I'd like to be sure I know exactly what that 
means.  Having a Java class that contains the version information seems 
brittle to me, in that someone could repackage improperly.

JAR manifests, while certainly not leveraged this way by most, were 
designed to contain versioning information.

> package org.apache.lucene;
> public class VERSION {
>  // ..
> }
> Why make life tough on users?

I'm merely discussing the options.  We've had the version information 
in the manifest already and was wondering why that isn't good enough.  
You've certainly given some reasons why you feel it is not good enough.

What do others think?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message