On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 10:59, Kyle Adams wrote: > Apologies in advance for any newbie mistakes, bad assumptions, etc. > > We'd love to utilize a JAR repository in our environment (either via Maven or > Ruper), but all of the proposals I've seen so far center around putting the version > number in the JAR file name. Is this the only way of accomplishing this?
No, the version of the JAR will always remain in the name of the JAR. Simply for the reason of sheer readability. You're not guessing when you look at the file. You accidentally copy a JAR without the version in name to a wrong directory and who knows how long you would spend looking for hard to find problems. Ultimately your if all your processes are not tied to the source of project information you are going to have problems. What if the product name of the JAR changed? Not going to happen that often it's true, but it would certainly be wise to only have to edit one source, that being the POMs. What we are striving for is comprehension and predictability. Removing the name of the version from the JAR is unacceptable in the name of convenience. Maybe you're not ready to use Maven to it's full extent but there are ways that you can consistently generate all your artifacts and deployments using the information provided in the POMs. > Thanks, > Kyle > > _____ > > Kyle Adams | Java Developer | Gordon Food Service | 616-717-6162 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
