I think this was done to make it consistent with naming convention used by UIMA-SDK and UIMA-AS. I realize that this perhaps is not a good model to follow. Reopening for discussion than. If I recall appending versions to jars will effect DUCC CLI only which explicitly names jars in a MANIFEST. Not too terrible to change I think.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Marshall Schor <m...@schor.com> wrote: > The popular convention (maven, Eclipse, others) is to now include the > version > with the name of the jar. This is being overridden by some custom Maven > configuration to exclude the version for the Jars produced by the build > for DUCC. > > Has this been discussed / debated and was there a good justification for > this > approach? If not, I would lean toward following the more prevalent > software > packaging practice these days, which seems to include the version as part > of the > jar name. See, for example the ducc distribution runtime lib/ directory > where > the majority (but not all) seem to follow this practice. > > -Marshall >
