there is a requirement for such marking.
agreeed +1 (for the mavenish way)
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
+1 for after the version number
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:26 PM, rick bolkey <[email protected]> wrote:
I would say put it after or leave it off. I would say leave it off unless
there's some Apache requirement to signify project status that I'm not
familiar with (not well versed here)
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:02 PM, scott comer <[email protected]> wrote:
ok, i think i see. this seems to be an implicit convention going on with
maven projects. i went
back and poked around some more, and the maven projects were the only ones
(of the few
i looked at) that put -incubating at the end. strangely, not all incubating
projects are marking
their stuff -incubating, more like not hardly any.
ok, so shall we let's be mavenish and put -incubating after the version no?
scott out
rick bolkey wrote:
uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen
"test"
used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <[email protected]> wrote:
rick! long time no see...
i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
after the version number.
can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
scott out
rick bolkey wrote:
Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <[email protected]> wrote:
oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
i've been making the examples work all day now.
manoj? you there?
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
--
james
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <[email protected]> wrote:
quoting from:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
Naming
Apache releases should contain the full name of the project
responsible
for
the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against
others
issuing artifacts with the same name.
For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would
be
|apache-foo-bar|.
Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
Whilst
in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
should
contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
insists
that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for
the
sake
of readability are usually acceptable).
For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
|foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
------------------
apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
i'd
rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
take
off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
stax,
wstx, etc.
the majority have it last when it appears at all.
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than
incubating-1.1.0.
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <[email protected]>
wrote:
so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since
we
are
trying to get this right in
release 1.1...
currently we build artifacts named like this:
etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
right? wrong?
scott out
