2015-12-01 21:55 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>:
> What would the “final” qualifier give us? It gives us correct and consistent versions not only for Maven, but for OSGi as well. Now we will have For Maven 1.5.0 > 1.5.0-b1 For OSGi 1.5.0 < 1.5.0-b1 If we will add *final* qualifier we will have For Maven 1.5.0-final > 1.5.0-b1 For OSGi 1.5.0-final > 1.5.0-b1 > From what I can see, Maven > version comparison will work fine without it. Does maven have special > handling for the “final” suffix? > > Yes, it is the same as having no suffix at all, e.g. 1.5.0 == 1.5.0-final Sergi > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Sergi Vladykin <sergi.vlady...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Raul! I like your synthesis. > > > > > > We have already agreed to use 1.5.0-*b1* format for early access > builds, > > > but I did not see any opinions about *final* for releases. > > > Does anyone have objections to use *final *qualifier for release builds > > to > > > conform both OSGi and Maven versioning? > > > > > > > There is also the possibility to drop the qualifier in package exports > > (Bundle-Version can stay as-is). > > But I don't like this, we'd be losing information, it leads to possibly > > incoherent environments and it's confusing. > > I just wanted to mention it for the sake of completeness. > > > > *Raúl Kripalani* > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and > > Messaging Engineer > > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > > >
