maven-m2-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Casey <jdca...@commonjava.org>
Subject Re: dependencies in reactorized builds
Date Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:40:14 GMT
What I'm saying is that in many cases this is perfectly acceptable. I 
definitely do not consider maven or plexus to be standard examples of 
this type of project, particularly in the case of plexus (which has only 
had one release, AFAIK, and probably not even that for many of the 
components...). Beyond this, it still seems logical to me to say that a 
version of the super POM could easily (and maybe should) be used as a 
version number for the platform, with sub-projects supplying options or 
complementary libraries for that platform. The platform specifies things 
like versions of dependencies, etc. so that all libraries associated 
with that platform-version are on the same page.

When I talk about using a single version across an entire project 
hierarchy, I'm drawing on my own experience developing end-user 
applications (not necessarily applications which have plugins with 
different release cycles, as in the case of maven). In these cases, it 
has been my experience that providing a single version number is 
perfectly okay.

We seem all to eager to ignore the customary versioning practices of 
major.minor. In many cases, the library version will be a derivative of 
the platform version, so upgrading the super POM's version should be 
related to upgrading the version on library POMs. Revisions to library 
POMs should only adjust minor version indicators until the next major 
version release of the platform. IMO, if you cannot derive a 
sub-project's version from it's parent [platform] then it should have a 
completely separate release cycle, and shouldn't share dependency 
information at all. Jakarta Commons would probably be a good example of 
when to not group the POMs under a super POM with dependency-version 
information.

Maczka Michal wrote:
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: John Casey [mailto:jdcasey@commonjava.org]
>>Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 3:27 PM
>>To: Maven 2 Developers List
>>Subject: Re: dependencies in reactorized builds
>>
> 
> []...
> 
> 
>>If you also consider that many projects that use an umbrella-like 
>>organization also release all artifacts in lock-step, it's a 
>>very useful 
>>tool. At the rool level, they can specify <version> for the 
>>project, and 
>>all inheriting projects can simply reference that version spec. If 
>>something changes in the default dependencies and you're not in a 
>>-SNAPSHOT version, you can bump the entire project's version while 
>>you're there.
>>
> 
> 
> I am not sure if I understood you - are you trying to say that projects like
> plexus (as a whole),geronimo, maven1
> should have the same version for all artifacts across the board?
> 
> Michal
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message