> -----Original Message----- > From: Stanley,Michael P. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 3:29 PM > To: 'Turbine Maven Developers List' > Subject: RE: Update > > > I think the issue has to do with dependencies of projects > that are branched. I can see the case where you would like > to have the head of a particular branch (say torque 3.0 tree > -vs- the head of development). > > I see how this can be useful, but I think the complexity it > adds (and confusion it can cause) overshadows the added value.
What confusion would it cause? I fail to see how it would be confusing at all. > -1 > > SNAPSHOT == bleeding edge == CVS HEAD > > Another note: (please correct me if I'm wrong) but can't > this be addressed on a project-by-project basis with > <artifcatID> elements > It can be addressed in that way but it doesn't make sense. In the case of Tomcat's major versions (3, 4, 5), it makes the most sense (which is still none). Think about the implications for upgrading a dependency to a project that changes the artifactId to allow for multiple snapshot versions: <dependency> <id>tomcat-3</id> <version>3.3</version> <dependency> Upgrading to 3.4 makes sense.... <dependency> <id>tomcat-3</id> <version>3.4</version> <dependency> Upgrading to 4.1 does not makes sense.... <dependency> <id>tomcat-4</id> <version>4.1</version> <dependency> >From a user's point of view, it makes no sense to include version in the artifactId. >It should be Tomcat, not Tomcat-X. For a project like Torque, it makes even less sense to do something like that. > - Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 2:38 PM > > To: Turbine Maven Developers List > > Subject: RE: Update > > > > On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 14:26, Quinton McCombs wrote: > > > I think this has been discussed before but why can't we have > commons- > > collections-2.1-SNAPSHOT? There are some projects which will have > > multiple development versions. Torque, for example, has 3.0.1 and > 3.1. > > > > Because snapshot means approximately HEAD (or whatever the > equivalent > is > > in other SCMs). I figured the the current version as part of the > > snapshot denotation was misleading. Even if you have development > > versions those are in fact releases and should not use snapshots. Or > if > > they are going on at the same time and haven't been > released then you > > should just use a timestamp. > > > > If I'm not understanding you correctly feel free to make additional > > comments. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 1:18 PM > > > > To: Turbine Maven Developers List > > > > Subject: Re: Update > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 11:36, Stéphane Mor wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > look e.g. at the commons-collections directory. There is > > > > > > > > > > > > commons-collections-2.0.20020914.015953 > > > > > > commons-collections-2.0.20020914.020746 > > > > > > commons-collections-2.0.20020914.020858 > > > > > > commons-collections-2.1-dev.jar > > > > > > > > > > > > which one should commons-collections-SNAPSHOT > map to? IMHO > > > > > > it maps to the wrong version. 2.1-dev is newer than > > > > > > 2.0.<something> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Patches welcome. > > > > > > > > I missed this one. Patches aren't needed. When a snapshot is > > > > deployed a mapping created which creates a pointer: > > > > > > > > http://www.ibiblio.org/maven/commons-jelly/jars/commons-jelly- snapshot- > version > > > > So the version stated in that file is what the snapshot corresponds to > if you wish to resolve it. > > > > I made a tool for the last maven release that uses these mappings to > interactively resolve all snapshots in a project.xml file. You can > actually do this interactively or just let maven go to town and do it for > you. > > > > We are actually trying to build things too, we realize snapshots can be > hazardous to your health but we know that. We have tried to make snapshots > convenient to use during development and easy to resolve for release. > -- > jvz. > > Jason van Zyl > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://tambora.zenplex.org > > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and > technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. > > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
