Leo Simons wrote: > > > Suggestion: make that a lot of small coarsely versioned artifacts. > That's easier to maintain. excalibur-fortress gets a single > version, our component libraries get a single version. > > I've already put this in place in SVN a few days back, > basically the version is kept in a few parent project.xml > files which are <extend/>ed. > I've had good experience only with this technique, and its > real simple. > In doing so I've bumped all the version numbers to 1 bigger > than the greatest individual number. > Hmm, at first I liked this, but then I thought about it and I'm not sure anymore :) Ok, if I understand that correctly this suggests that although e.g. the component library has different artifacts, they all get the same version number but are still separate distributions. But now imagine if in one artifact incompatible changes occur, this requires a version number change. But now all artifacts get this version number change and it looks to users that all artifacts provide real new features or incompatible changes. But in reality only one changed. What about only one distribution for components etc?
> Distributions > ------------- > Observation: we have rather a lot of small artifacts. If the > distribution layout is ever ****ed up (like it was for > avalon) and inconsistent, that's a pain to maintain. > > Suggestion: we try really well to be consistent and > automated. We set this up correctly once, then avoid touching > most of it for a long time to come. > > I would like to see us not ever modify the distribution > directory manually, but do it all using maven. +1 Carsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache Excalibur Project -- URL: http://excalibur.apache.org/
