Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume that this is being done as part of some Commons-wide policy change? If so, it's incumbent on us to clearly document the impact of this change on downstream users, because it is going to be pretty disruptive until all downstream users have rev'd their POMs to reflect the new versions. It shouldn't be disruptive at all if the artifacts are properly relocated in the Maven repo. ISTR Dennis Lundberg was working on it. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
On 11/24/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume that this is being done as part of some Commons-wide policy change? If so, it's incumbent on us to clearly document the impact of this change on downstream users, because it is going to be pretty disruptive until all downstream users have rev'd their POMs to reflect the new versions. It shouldn't be disruptive at all if the artifacts are properly relocated in the Maven repo. ISTR Dennis Lundberg was working on it. In the meantime though, we have 12 components with org.apache.commons and 22 with the original (for some value of 12 and 22). Anyone against rolling them back to the original group ids? Discovery, Digester, DbUtils and Betwixt are all close to release and it sounds like we're not ready to release that way yet. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
On 11/24/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume that this is being done as part of some Commons-wide policy change? If so, it's incumbent on us to clearly document the impact of this change on downstream users, because it is going to be pretty disruptive until all downstream users have rev'd their POMs to reflect the new versions. It shouldn't be disruptive at all if the artifacts are properly relocated in the Maven repo. Does that mean that you will be able to use commons-digester:commons-digester:1.8 *or* org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.8 after Digester 1.8 is released? For a specific example, consider an app that uses, say, Shale and MyFaces 1.1.4. Even if we update the Shale dependency to the new groupId, an application will still inherit a transitive dependency on the old version until a new MyFaces release with an updated dependency. Does the relocation take care of this? Craig ISTR Dennis Lundberg was working on it. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
Henri Yandell wrote: In the meantime though, we have 12 components with org.apache.commons and 22 with the original (for some value of 12 and 22). Anyone against rolling them back to the original group ids? Discovery, Digester, DbUtils and Betwixt are all close to release and it sounds like we're not ready to release that way yet. I'm +1 to rolling back. Stephen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that you will be able to use commons-digester:commons-digester:1.8 *or* org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.8 after Digester 1.8 is released? For a specific example, consider an app that uses, say, Shale and MyFaces 1.1.4. Even if we update the Shale dependency to the new groupId, an application will still inherit a transitive dependency on the old version until a new MyFaces release with an updated dependency. You relocate the existing releases that are already in the repository. Then Maven is able to figure out that commons-digester:commons-digester:1.7 is really org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.7, and is the same artifact as org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.8. That will stop it from including both. The whole of Commons doesn't have to switch at once. The trick is to relocate _all_ of the old artifacts for any given component, then start releasing that component under the new groupId. Maven will then print warnings that this artifact has been relocated... which will prompt people to switch over. -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
Wendy Smoak wrote: On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume that this is being done as part of some Commons-wide policy change? If so, it's incumbent on us to clearly document the impact of this change on downstream users, because it is going to be pretty disruptive until all downstream users have rev'd their POMs to reflect the new versions. It shouldn't be disruptive at all if the artifacts are properly relocated in the Maven repo. ISTR Dennis Lundberg was working on it. Yes, I was. See [1] and [2] for a bit of background. Unfortunately I ran out of steam. There just didn't seem to be any real commitment to the idea from the community. Sorry to have left things in a not-quite-finished state. I did manage to write some documentation [3] on how to manage the relocation that Wendy speaks of. My stand on this at the moment is to await the transition to Maven 2 as the main build platform for Commons. When we start using Maven 2 to build our binary releases, they should at the same time change the groupId. However, if someone feels that we should go ahead with the migration using Maven 1 I'll help in any way I can. [1]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-commons-dev/200605.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-commons-dev/200605.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [3]http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-relocation.html -- Dennis Lundberg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Digester] Change of Maven Group Id
On 11/24/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/24/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that you will be able to use commons-digester:commons-digester:1.8 *or* org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.8 after Digester 1.8 is released? For a specific example, consider an app that uses, say, Shale and MyFaces 1.1.4. Even if we update the Shale dependency to the new groupId, an application will still inherit a transitive dependency on the old version until a new MyFaces release with an updated dependency. You relocate the existing releases that are already in the repository. Then Maven is able to figure out that commons-digester:commons-digester:1.7 is really org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.7, and is the same artifact as org.apache.commons:commons-digester:1.8. That will stop it from including both. The whole of Commons doesn't have to switch at once. The trick is to relocate _all_ of the old artifacts for any given component, then start releasing that component under the new groupId. Maven will then print warnings that this artifact has been relocated... which will prompt people to switch over. If we can get the relocation to work as Wendy described, then I'm +1 on doing the groupId migration piecemeal, as Commons packages get released. This addresses my concern. -- Wendy Craig - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
