I won't even ask why would someone want to use T4 and T5 at the same
time inside single WAR...
However, I still don't like the fact that T4 is imposing restrictions on
T5 artifact naming. If future is T5, then T5 should be priority (with
consistently named artifacts).
So, I suggest some other options:
* T4 uses "tapestry-annotations", T5 uses "tapestry-annotation" or
"tapestry-annot". It will most probably confuse users who migrate from
T4 but with good migration documentation, it shouldn't be a big issue.
* instead of requiring T5 to use "tapestry5-annotations" why not make
T4 use "tapestry4-annotations" and leave "tapestry-annotations" to T5? A
minor headache for T4 users but IMHO it is better than headache for all
(current and potential) T5 users.
* or switch all T4 artifacts to use "tapestry4-*" naming convention
and leave "tapestry-annotations" to T5.
Neeme
Igor Drobiazko wrote:
All Tapestry artifacts have the same groupId: org.apache.tapestry.
You can not use 2 artifacts with same groupId and artifactId but different
versions in the same pom.xml
If you want to use t4 and t5 in the same war which is created by maven , you
have to use different artifactIds.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Neeme Praks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Why was this change necessary?
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tapestry/tapestry5/trunk/tapestry-annotations/pom.xml?view=diff&r1=657126&r2=657127
Why is it a problem to have the same artifact name for Tapestry 4.x and
5.x? The version numbers are different, so what's the issue?
[snip]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
