Fine. I don't feel strongly enough about it to continue to argue against putting the artifacts on Maven Central.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Artifacts can't be removed from Maven in any normal circumstance, but, > it's no problem. > > The argument that people might keep using it goes for any older > release. Why would anyone use 1.6.0 when 1.6.1 exists? yet we keep > 1.6.0 just for the record and to not break builds. It may be that > Foobar 3.0-beta depends on 2.0.0-preview and 3.0 will shortly depend > on 2.0.0, but, killing the -preview artifact breaks that other > historical release/branch. > > I agree that "-alpha-1" would have been better. But we're talking > about working around pretty bone-headed behavior, to not notice what > version of Spark they build against, or not understand what > 2.0.0-preview vs 2.0.0 means in a world of semver. > > BTW Maven sorts 2.0.0-preview before 2.0.0, so 2.0.0 would show up as > the latest, when released, in tools like mvn > versions:display-dependency-updates. You could exclude the preview > release by requiring version [2.0.0,). > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com> > wrote: > > Precisely because the naming of the preview artifacts has to fall > outside of > > the normal versioning, I can easily see incautious Maven users a few > months > > from now mistaking the preview artifacts as spark-2.0-something-special > > instead of spark-2.0-something-stale. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org > >
