Hello Tommy, Lasse and all,
as Lasse suggests it *may* be a good fit for classifiers. But I want to
emphasize that to my knowledge, the miscellaneous artifacts with different
classifiers sharing the same 'main' artifact HAVE TO BE INSTALLED OR
DEPLOYED AT THE SAME TIME. So if you deploy your
I like both of these approaches better than the Scala approach to binary
compatibility, which is to munge a version into the artifact ID. That feels
very broken to me, but unfortunately that is their standard now.
I have heard of complaints that using classifiers to specify bytecode level
can
Even if putting the bytecode version in the version works, you should
consider using classifier field instead. See for example
https://www.baeldung.com/maven-artifact-classifiers
su 7. huhtik. 2024 klo 20.22 Tommy Svensson (to...@natusoft.se) kirjoitti:
>
> These days I'm *only* coding in Groovy
These days I'm *only* coding in Groovy since it is such a nice, painless
language and most of my GitHub code is in Groovy.
Groovy does a lot different than Java, one such difference is that you can now
select what bytecode level to produce when building, this independent from the
source. That
