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? > >> > >Definitely. > > 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 > zip/tar.gzip
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. Yes. -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/ Pub Key:http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/public-key.asc
