Hi,
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >> Multi-module projects are quite common and the case you mention isn't
> >> unusual.
> >
> > Please show an example.
>
> Spring, Jetty, Jackson, Log4j, Hadoop, Lucene, Maven, Hipparchus...
> There is no lack of examples. Multi-module projects routinely publish
> new releases with some of their modules unmodified.
I think that I'd agree w/ Emmanuel here. It will be very strange where
on change in rng-core from v1 to v2 one will have to update rng-module1
from v1 to v2 (since I believe that rng-module1 will depend on rng-core),
while
version update of rng-module1 will not cause reciprocal effect.
IMO it's much easier when user will be able to use one version for all
rng-* modules,
rather than starting to struggle what version need to be taken for what
module.
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.commons</groupId>
<artifactId>rng-core</artifactId>
<version>${rng.version}</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.commons</groupId>
<artifactId>rng-tools</artifactId>
<version>${rng.version}</version>
</dependency>
Looks better than
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.commons</groupId>
<artifactId>rng-core</artifactId>
<version>v1</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.commons</groupId>
<artifactId>rng-tools</artifactId>
<version>v99</version>
</dependency>
And it's much easier to support.
Best regards,
Artem Barger.
