On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 12:00:19PM +0100, Simone Gianni wrote: > Reinhard Poetz wrote: > > > > I've been working on the release for the past couple of hours. As it's > > late here, I need some sleep. Unfortunatly this means that the trunk > > is broken ATM. I will continue later today and fix all poms. > > > > Sorry for any inconveniences. > > > Just a quick question. Why don't we use version ranges instead of fixed > version numbers in our internal pom dependencies? > > While using a version range on an external dependency can be dangerous > 'cause we are not sure they will respect versioning rules, we could use > them for internal dependencies and save a lot of work when the version > of a single component changes and avoid having to cleanup the > repository, rebuild everything, change the version in the pom, re-clean > the repository and so on. Also because when we will have "1.0.0" version > of a block published on public repository it will be a real pain to > debug which components are still pointing to instead than to the new > 1.0.1 version.
AFAIK version requirements like '1.0.0' are so-called soft requirements, a recommendation. A hard requirement looks like '[1.0.0]'. See this page for more info: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Dependency+Mediation+and+Conflict+Resolution A soft version requirement of '1.0' will use 1.0.1 if available I think. Fred
