I think an implicit Version of 0.0 might be reasonable for jars that do not follow Maven
conventions. Personally I think forcing everyone to rename their jars is a bit intrusive as not
everyone would want / need to do this.
How about this:
mattsjar.jar would be implicitly mattsjar-0.0.jar without the usewr having to
change a thing.
Thoughts?
Matt
Joe Bohn wrote:
I have a situation where I need to make several web modules dependent
upon a large number of jars. I'd like to add the jars to the Geronimo
repo and add the dependencies into the plans for the web modules.
However, most of the jars don't follow the maven naming convention
because the names don't include a version (and I'd rather not rename all
the jars).
I know that there are changes being included in 1.1 to make the version
in a reference optional. However, I doubt that it is possible to
reference a jar in the repo that doesn't contain any version. Just
thought I should ask in case it really is possible. I could see where
this might be something users would like when they have picked up jars
from various places which may or may not contain a version in the jar name.
If it *is* possible to have a non-versioned jar in the repo ... how do
we differentiate in geronimo 1.1 between a dependency on a non-versioned
jar versus a dependency on the latest version of a jar (in case both are
present).
Thanks for the help,
Joe
