though if you are putting build numbers in a label and you plan on having
more than 10 builds between minor version increments, left pad with zero's
or else you will have to use crazy counting...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997
998 9990, etc

On 3 April 2010 18:02, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>wrote:

> There is nothing stopping you from rolling a release but keeping the next
> version number the same as the current
>
> 1.0-SNAPSHOT -> 1.0-build-56 -> 1.0-SNAPSHOT -> 1.0-build-57 ->
> 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> that way developers don't have to worry, QA get their named builds and
> everyone is happy
>
> (Might take two steps, but IIRC last time I used the release plugin you
> could have the old dev version = new dev version as long as the release
> version was non-SNAPSHOT)
>
> -STephen
>
>
> On 3 April 2010 17:59, Scott Susslin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> We're using Hudson to do our builds and Archiva to host our Maven remote
>> repo, which I'm quite happy with.
>>
>> The only resolution we can put on these version numbers is either once
>> every three weeks, or once a day. "Once every 3 weeks" versioning is already
>> happening; "once a day" is too much to saddle a person with (hence my
>> attempt to automate).
>>
>> BUT, not only does it look like it's not possible to do this, I can always
>> incorporate this build number into a display in the software, as opposed to
>> changing the artifact version. That should definitely suffice, and will keep
>> Archiva from getting overloaded with artifacts unnecessarily.
>>
>> Thanks everyone! I've been convinced to let it go. :-p
>> - Scott
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: "Gorham-Engard, Frank" <[email protected]>
>> To: Maven Users List <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Sat, April 3, 2010 7:26:39 AM
>> Subject: RE: Using variables in POM's version field
>>
>> Would I be right in thinking that the entire purpose of a SNAPSHOT
>> artifact is so that dependent modules don't have to be edited every time a
>> new artifact is produced. This makes the developer's job easier as long as
>> they are willing to accept the risk of having the dependee artifact change
>> at any time.
>>
>> If so, what would be reason for making an artifact with a build number in
>> the artifact version string that changes every time the artifact is deployed
>> and calling it a SNAPSHOT? The dependent developers would have to adjust
>> their dependencies each time a new dependee artifact is generated. But, that
>> is the way a release artifact works. Any advantage gained by deploying as a
>> SNAPSHOT is eliminated by having a different version string each time.
>>
>> Have I made it clear why doing this is misguided? Just go ahead and deploy
>> a release artifact with the build number in the version. The result is the
>> same. One artifact per version string.
>>
>> Also, the unresolved build number doesn't occur if you create the new
>> build number before starting Maven and pass it into the build as a property
>> on the command line. All build systems will support this need. I noticed
>> everyone has mentioned their favorite build system so I will mention mine,
>> QuickBuild2. A free version is available that will support a limited number
>> of projects. Includes a promotion model and configuration inheritance as
>> part of its design. No plugins needed.
>>
>> <!-- Frank Gorham-Engard →
>> "It is a misnomer to label any practice 'a best practice';
>>  a practice is only best in the specific context in which it performs
>> well."
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kathryn Huxtable [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:39 PM
>> To: Maven Users List
>> Subject: Re: Using variables in POM's version field
>>
>> Correct, and it's a bad idea. -K
>>
>> On Apr 2, 2010, at 6:15 PM, Scott Susslin wrote:
>>
>> > I figured something like this was why it wasn't working. So sounds like,
>> given Maven 2, it can't work. True?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: Justin Edelson <[email protected]>
>> > To: Maven Users List <[email protected]>
>> > Sent: Fri, April 2, 2010 4:05:10 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Using variables in POM's version field
>> >
>> > Amongst other reasons, allowing runtime variable interpolation in the
>> > coordinates would prevent the reactor from properly calculating a
>> > multi-module build plan. The coordinates at the start of the build
>> > must remain the coordinates throughout the build.
>> >
>> > On Apr 2, 2010, at 5:14 PM, Scott Susslin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Why?
>> >>
>> >> Also, is it possible?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message ----
>> >> From: Justin Edelson <[email protected]>
>> >> To: Maven Users List <[email protected]>
>> >> Sent: Fri, April 2, 2010 12:05:32 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: Using variables in POM's version field
>> >>
>> >> This is a bad idea. Don't do it.
>> >>
>> >> On Apr 2, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Scott Susslin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I'm trying to use the buildnumber plugin to control the version
>> >>> field of a POM.
>> >>>
>> >>>  <version>1.0.${buildNumber}-SNAPSHOT</version>
>> >>>
>> >>> The "package" phase works fine, creating a file with the parsed
>> >>> value in the filename. The "install" and "deploy" don't seem to
>> >>> parse the variable. When they run, I get something like the
>> >>> following:
>> >>>
>> >>>  [INFO] Installing PROJECT/artifact-0.1.334-SNAPSHOT.swc to ~.m2/
>> >>> repository/PROJECT/artifact/0.1.${buildNumber}-SNAPSHOT/
>> >>> artifact-0.1.${buildNumber}-SNAPSHOT.swc
>> >>>
>> >>> Anyone have any experience with this?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>> - Scott
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to