On 13 August 2011 21:22, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > If you change stuff around, you need to change the package name(s), > right? Otherwise, you could have collisions on the classpath.
Yes, but then everyone using the code will need to edit and recompile. So best to keep binary compatibility if at all possible. > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Jörg Schaible > <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: >> Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> >>> On 2011-08-12, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >>> >>>> IMHO unless the main package name has to change due to binary >>>> incompatibilities in the new version I would stick to the original >>>> groupId/artifactId (ie org.apache.jcs/jcs). >>> >>> I agree with you. But if jcs changes the artifactId (which has happened >>> in trunk) there is no point in keeping the groupId or is there? >> >> Right. Different G:A means different project and neither Maven nor any other >> dependency managing system will match those properly (even in case of this >> fruitless relocation stuff) calculating versions. >> >> - Jörg >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
