+1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention than anything else.
I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7. Cheers, Eddie On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay. I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our distribution. I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a different location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does anyone object to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository? I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we can't get rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a solution for when OpenJPA graduates. On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes, but when we > publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website downloads), > we name the files as we like. > > -dain > > On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release > > 0.9.7. > > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file > > names. The > > problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we > > provide and generate their own names ( > > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip). > > > > I searched through the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list archives > > and it > > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a > > response > > of "working as designed". Here's an example > > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment- > > tf1449780s177.html#a3916784 > > > > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the > > names for > > the 0.9.7 release? > > > > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed > > would be to > > change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with > > openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a > > dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the > > version > > number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to > > depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > -Michael Dick > > -- -Michael Dick
