Thanks Martin. +1 to punting and solving this problem later, but not letting it block the 0.3 release.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: Martin Desruisseaux <[email protected]> Organization: Geomatys Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: Monday, July 1, 2013 2:31 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache SIS 0.3 release - versions >Hello all > >I replaced the "0.3-geoapi3.0" version number by a plain "0.3" on trunk. >We may try to manage the branches using Maven classifier instead. Maven >documentation said: > > As a motivation for this element, consider for example a project > that offers an artifact targeting JRE 1.5 but at the same time also > an artifact that still supports JRE 1.4. The first artifact could be > equipped with the classifier jdk15 and the second one with jdk14 > such that clients can choose which one to use. > >Which is pretty close to our case. However the issue that I'm facing is >that classifier applies only to JAR files; the pom.xml files have >identical names regardless of classifier, which implies that our pom.xml >need to be identical on all branches if we want to avoid chaotic >behaviour when two branches are used on the same machine. I don't know >yet how to do that, even with Maven profiles. Problem is: if a project >declares a SIS dependency with classifier A, how to ensure that the >transitive SIS dependencies also use classifier A? Does a Maven property >exist for telling us which classifier was used by the project that >imported us? > >I think that we can ignore this problem for now, and keep the "0.3-jdk6" >and "0.3-jdk7" version number for the JDK6 and JDK7 branches for now, >which shouldn't hurt since they are not released. However I think that >we will probably need to find a solution if we release a GeoAPI 3.1 or >4.0 standard, since I would like to release both a "SIS for GeoAPI 3.0" >and "SIS for GeoAPI 3.1/4.0" at that time. > > Martin >
