Hahaha, I kind of expected this question. We had a discussion once about jarfile naming and came across this problem as well. Since we're working in a closed environment we can perfectly add the requirement that all packages must depend on the same version of for instance JDom. That why we chose to NOT include versioning in our filenames. If I would have to make that decision right now (and I'm probably going to, because we're about to integrate Maven!) I would not do this again, so we're starting to name our jarfiles after the versions.
But... besides putting the version of the jar file in the filename, I would still be very happy if version information would also be included in the jar-manifest. Take a look at the manifest below, which is generated by our build system. Version infromation can perfectly displayed in GUIs. Besides that, for .ear file creation, some app.servers require the insertion of a classpath entry, so in the end you'll have to modify the manifest anyway. Manifest-Version: 1.0 Specification-Title: Classifier Logic Specification-Vendor: SmartHaven B.V. Created-By: SmartHaven Jibe - 3 May 2002 01:41 PM - build Implementation-Vendor: SmartHaven B.V. Specification-Version: 1.0 Implementation-Version: MAIN-b556 - 3 May 2002 01:41 PM Implementation-Title: Classifier Logic I would propose the following: keep things like they are but add the functionality of version information in jar files. This should not be hard to do. Maybe a switch could be introduced that lets people choose whether to put version information in the filenames. Pro: - people can rename jdom-b8.jar (for example) to jdom.jar and STILL see the version information - version information in the manifest makes it possible to display versions in a GUI and add more information - you can add information about build-times, buildnumbers, etc. - this is the way standards say it should be done ;-) Con: - it's a little more work ;-) - it makes things a litte more complicated - ... shoot... -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 16 May 2002 10:34 To: Turbine Maven Developers List Subject: Re: Versioning in Manifest file (+ modularity of plugins) So how do we keep jdom beta 7 and beta 8 in the repository at the same time if they're both called jdom.jar? -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Work: http://www.multitask.com.au Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers "Alef Arendsen" To: "Turbine Maven Developers List (E-mail)" <alef@smarthav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> en.com> cc: Subject: Versioning in Manifest file (+ modularity of plugins) 05/16/02 05:46 PM Please respond to "Turbine Maven Developers List" According to the manifest specification by Sun (see http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/guide/jar/jar.html#Main%20Attributes) people should enter the version information of packages into the Jar file. Since the version information of the package built with Maven is mentioned in the project descriptor, it wouldn't be hard to generate such a manifest. This can help a lot with updating software, and defining plugin versioning schemes... idea? Alef ====================================== Alef Arendsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] SmartHaven B.V. www.smarthaven.com Arlandaweg 92 M: +31 6 19 338 921 1043 EX Amsterdam T: +31 20 586 90 57 Netherlands F: +31 84 882 26 39 ====================================== -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: < mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: < mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
