Unfortunately, there are already some 'third party' packages that depend
on jdom 2.0.1, and thus, people using the new jdom2 2.0.2 will have two
different versions of the same jar .... right? ... which is perhaps
worse than not having it at all ... ;-)
Rolf
On 28/05/2012 6:12 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Publish another copy with a '2' in the artifactId?
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Rolf Lear<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all.
I maintain the JDOM project, and unfortunately it seems I made a 'novice'
error when deploying a new version of JDOM to maven-central.
Thus, the situation is as follows:
http://search.maven.org/#browse|-1946144149
JDOM 2.x was released with a separate (new) package name for the express
purpose of allowing the user to run both JDOM 1.x and 2.x in the same JVM.
This works fine for non-maven users, but maven users are not able to have
dependencies on both JDOM 1.1.3 and JDOM 2.0.1 simultaneously.
So, I have already been 'criticized' for the fact that this situation could
have been avoided by using a different artifact id for the new JDOM 2.x
releases... and I am not looking for more criticism... what I need is some
insight as to what the correct procedure would be to do *now* to produce the
best outcome.
How do I best resolve this situation?
Bear in mind that people use JDOM from all sorts of places... and JDOM 1.x
versions are dependencies of many other 'third-party' maven projects.
Rolf
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
