On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Nick Chalko wrote:
Is a mandatory version dir and a optional version suffix on artifacts ok?
/project/version/artifact[-version].jar
Or ( as is current practice ):
/project-version/artifact[-version].jar
Again: my main concern with [-version].jar is the lack of consistency.
I can live with it beeing required, if that's what most people
think is best. But if this is the case, then we should make it consistent
and make sure the projects themself support it. The jar name may
be used in many places, and it will be a mess if we end up with
multiple names or a wrong version is picked up ( just think about security
- what happens if you install a fixed jar but the program uses the
old one because that's how it was configured somewhere )
+1 on having an external manifest:
/project-version/artifact.jar-MANIFEST
And maybe:
/project-version/descriptor.xml ( with all the info in gump - if
we need more I think we should update the gump descriptors )
There are already tools to process the MANIFEST, and a signed jar
can be verified automatically. It is possible to include a lot of
extra headers in the manifest ( like copyright/license, etc).
Costin
