Nick Chalko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/10/2003 10:32:28 AM:

> >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.

dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Pub Key:

Reply via email to