Nick Chalko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/10/2003 10:32:28 AM:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Nick Chalko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/10/2003 09:05:06 AM:
> >>Must every artivact have the version in the file name?
> Some artifacts don't like having the full version number.
> dll for example. I think the DLL name needs to be stable and thus
> would not have the full version info.
> For the dll example we can mandate that it has to be put in a versioned
That works, but I'm still not sure why DLLs are a special case. Lots of
DLLs have a version number as part of the file. What the file is called
when it's downloaded is a different issue to what the file name stored in
the repo is. I think the repo must stored versioned file names.
> Also, some people prefer to see xalan.jar not xalan-1.4.jar.
They know how to rename the file, right?
> I prefer to have version in the filename. but do we want to FORCE that
> on projects prublishing to our repository.
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting