Hi,

as I worked on a patch to fix the archetypes for wicket 7.x I came across 
several versions of jetty.

Like in the current master it is:

› grep -r 'jetty.*version' .
./archetypes/quickstart/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml:         
<jetty.version>8.1.12.v20130726</jetty.version>
./archetypes/quickstart/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml:         
        <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./archetypes/quickstart/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml:         
                <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./pom.xml:              <jetty.version>8.1.13.v20130916</jetty.version>
./pom.xml:              <jetty9.version>9.0.6.v20130930</jetty9.version>
./pom.xml:                              <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./pom.xml:                                      
<version>${jetty.version}</version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-javax/pom.xml:
        <jetty.version>9.1.0.RC0</jetty.version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-javax/pom.xml:
                    <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-javax/pom.xml:
                    <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-javax/pom.xml:
                    <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-jetty/pom.xml:
            <version>${jetty.version}</version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-jetty9/pom.xml:
                   <version>${jetty9.version}</version>

Discount the one I changed in the archetypes, that still leaves:

./pom.xml:              <jetty.version>8.1.13.v20130916</jetty.version>
./pom.xml:              <jetty9.version>9.0.6.v20130930</jetty9.version>
./wicket-experimental/wicket-native-websocket/wicket-native-websocket-javax/pom.xml:
        <jetty.version>9.1.0.RC0</jetty.version>

It there a reason keep em all and if not, what would be the best candidate to 
consolidate on?

mf

Reply via email to