On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Mykel Alvis wrote:
Total now $0.04:
I totally agree, but since Maven 2 already uses directories with the
version in it's name, it should be possible to store the jar itself
without a version in it's name. The path to the jar already has it's
version in it, so you can still
On 4/22/05, Kenney Westerhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Mykel Alvis wrote:
Total now $0.04:
I totally agree, but since Maven 2 already uses directories with the
version in it's name, it should be possible to store the jar itself
without a version in it's name. The path
Just chiming in for the first time since I started using Maven 1 (Other than
asking new user questions).
I have had a love/hate relationship with Maven ever since I started using it
on a large project integrating the output of 4 different development groups.
One of the things that has
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: Maven2: dependencies with non-conformant file names.
On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 09:36 +0200, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Mykel Alvis wrote:
Total now $0.04:
I totally agree, but since Maven 2 already uses directories with the
version in it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 22, 2005, at 12:19, Mykel Alvis wrote:
If the manner of accessing the repository were abstracted, one might
be able
to write a repository manager that would retrieve dependencies
arbitrarily
from a service rather than from the filesystem. For
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Craig S.Cottingham wrote:
On Apr 22, 2005, at 12:19, Mykel Alvis wrote:
If the manner of accessing the repository were abstracted, one might
be able
to write a repository manager that would retrieve dependencies
arbitrarily
from a service
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'll add my $0.02:
http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/jdcasey/archives/001053_dependencies_to_version_or_not_to_version.html
Cheers,
- -john
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 09:36 +0200, Kenney Westerhof wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Mykel
On 4/22/05, Ilyevsky, Leonid (Equity Trading) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that if third party jar file name does not comply with maven
naming convention, the only way is to rename it.
The dependency element always requires version number, and the jar
tag (supposed to take explicit file
I find it hard to believe the JAR would never change, so some version
is appropriate :)
Just because the contents of a JAR file change, the name does not have
too. My company, for whatever reason, chooses not to include any kind
of version info in the JAR's name.
I don't mean this to sound
On 4/22/05, Jamie Bisotti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just because the contents of a JAR file change, the name does not have
too. My company, for whatever reason, chooses not to include any kind
of version info in the JAR's name.
I don't mean this to sound rude, or come off like an ass, but...
My $0.02
I don't think it's rude at all. It's a completely valid point, on the
presumption that you're not held to being responsible deterministically
reproducing the results of a given build. A co-worker of mine shares that
same opinion and it's an oft-discussed issue with regard to our
Ha! Should've waited until Shakiyama Porter had his say. Could've saved
myself some typing. :)
12 matches
Mail list logo
