On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 13:06, James Strachan wrote: > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I read it, I just don't think it's intuitive. > > > > "If a "+" is found then the artifact name is a concatenation of the lhs > > and rhs of the "+" where the "+" is replaced with a "-". If there are" > > > > ant+optional version 1.4.1 becomes ant-optional-1.4.1.jar, whereas ant > > version 1.4.1 becomes ant-1.4.1.jar... > > > > I understand it and why..........but intuitive it aint. To me it looks > > like the <id> is playing double duty as a tag. It'd more intuitive to give > > it another name rather than cramming it into the same tag, IMHO. > > I tend to agree. How about we have > > <id>ant</id> > <part>optional</id> > <version>1.4.1</version> > > Which if no part is specified its ignored (ant-1.4.1.jar), otherwise its > used to make ant-optional-1.4.1.jar
The <id> of a dependency cannot be identical. A dependency is on an artifact of a project. Having the the same <id> for multiple dependencies gives me a cyclic error in the beanwriter, and really the ids should not be the same. They somehow have to be different. > James > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.comm > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
