On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >>The underlying principle is; The downstream user must not be confused >>and really be aware of that it is not an endorsed Apache release. >> >>Now, exactly where to draw the line is a tough nut to crack. My >>understanding of 'absolutes' are; >> >> - The source distribution MUST have "incubating" in the file name. >> - Any binary distribution MUST have 'incubating" in the file name. >> - Any binary, source or javadoc JAR that is distributed MUST have >>"incubating" in the version. > > We are definitely compliant with the first two issues. The last one is a bit > vague, but it implies that we could be compliant simply by including > "incubating" in the version we include in the JAR's manifest...
"Version" was referring to the Maven Artifact Version, which is visible externally and in dependency declarations such as; <dependency> <groupId>org.apache.pivot</groupId> <artifactId>pivot-core</artifactId> <version>1.1-incubating</version> </dependency> So, IFF you want to distribute via the Maven system, the above version must contain the "incubating" word. IFF you are not planning to distribute via Maven's repositories, then that part is moot, and someone else who might upload to Maven repos is expected to do the right thing. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
