I don't think Maven will recognize 0.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT as a snapshot. It will recognize it as 0.1.0 with the "incubating-SNAPSHOT" qualifier.
For instance, looking at the code for parsing qualifiers, it only handles the string "SNAPSHOT" specially, not "incubating-SNAPSHOT". http://maven.apache.org/ref/3.0.4/maven-artifact/xref/org/apache/maven/artifact/versioning/ComparableVersion.html#52 Looking at this Stack Overflow answer ( http://stackoverflow.com/a/31482463/4539304) it looks like support was improved in Maven 3.2.4 to allow multiple qualifiers (its still unclear whether incubating would be considered by the code as a qualifier). Either way, we shouldn't expect users to upgrade to Maven 3.2.4 or newer just to get reasonable version number treatment. It seems like sticking with the standard "-SNAPSHOT" and "" for releases is preferable. If the goal is to get incubating into the file names, I think we can configure the Maven build process to do so. For instance, finalName defaults to "<finalName>${project.artifactId}-${project.version}</finalName>". If we changed that to "<finalName>${project.artifactId}-incubating-${project.version}</finalName>" it seems like we'd "incubating" in the file names without needing to complicate the release numbering. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:24 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > 1. True for Python, but it can go in a folder in sdk (sdk/python) > anyway. I think the DSLs (Java based) and other languages that we might > introduce (Scala, ...) can be the same. > > 2. The incubating has to be in the released filenames. So it can be in > the version or name. Anyway, my proposal was 0.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT > for a SNAPSHOT and 0.1.0-incubating for a release (it's what I did in > the PR). Like this, the Maven standards are still valid. > > Regards > JB > > On 03/21/2016 06:20 PM, Ben Chambers wrote: > > 1. Regarding "java" as a module -- are we sure that other languages will > be > > packaged using Maven as well? For instance, Python has its own ecosystem > > which likely doesn't play well with Python. > > > > 2. Using the literal "SNAPSHOT" as the qualifier has special meaning > Maven > > -- it is newer than all other qualified releases, but older than any > > unqualified release. It feels like we should take advantage of this, > which > > makes our versioning more consistent with Maven standards. Specifically, > > snapshots should be 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT and releases should be 0.1.0. > > 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT because that uses the standard definition of SNAPSHOT > > 0.1.0 because if we had any qualifier than the 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT would > be > > considered newer > > > > Davor's suggestion of putting the "incubating" in the name or description > > of the artifacts seems like a preferable option. > > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:33 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi beamers, > >> > >> I updated the PR according to your comments. > >> > >> I have couple of points I want to discuss: > >> > >> 1. All modules use the same groupId (org.apache.beam). In order to have > >> a cleaner structure on the Maven repo, I wonder if it's not better to > >> have different groupId depending of the artifacts. For instance, > >> org.apache.beam.sdk, containing a module with java as artifactId (it > >> will contain new artifacts with id python, scala, ...), > >> org.apache.beam.runners containing modules with flink and spark as > >> artifactId, etc. Thoughts ? > >> 2. The version has been set to 0.1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT for all > >> artifacts, including the runners. It doesn't mean that the runners will > >> have to use the same version as parent (they can have their own release > >> cycle). However, as we "bootstrap" the project, I used the same version > >> in all modules. > >> > >> Now, I'm starting two new commits: > >> - renaming of the packages > >> - folders re-organization > >> > >> Thanks ! > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> On 03/21/2016 01:56 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > >>> Hi Davor, > >>> > >>> thank you so much for your comments. I'm updating the PR according to > >>> your PR (and will provide explanation to some changes). > >>> > >>> Thanks dude ! > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> > >>> On 03/21/2016 06:29 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >>>> I left a few comments on PR #46. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks JB for doing this; a clear improvement. > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I started the renaming process from Dataflow to Beam. > >>>>> > >>>>> I submitted a first PR about the Maven coordinates: > >>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam/pull/46 > >>>>> > >>>>> I will start the packages renaming (updating the same PR). For the > >>>>> directories structure, I would like to talk with Frances, Dan, Tyler, > >>>>> and > >>>>> Davor first. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> JB > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >> [email protected] > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com > >> > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
