I can see both sides of the argument. Having a version number in the file name makes it easier to figure out if a file is out of date, and if you are using tools like Geronimo or Maven to track dependencies it is helpful. But when you want to make sure that you don't have multiple copies of the same jar in your classpath it is easier to replace ojdbc14.jar than it is to look for ojdc14-10.0.5.jar, ojdcb14-10.0.4.jar, etc.
We have gotten clobbered before when we inadvertently left behind an older jar that had a different version number in the filename in the classpath. I personally like having the version number readily available. Dov On 4/22/09 5:33 PM, "Mike Schrag" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> but really, how often are you identifying jar files using the jar >>> API's? >> You don't ask that seriously?? One favorite app-server-look-a-like >> might come in mind otherwise... > I'm not arguing AGAINST putting versions in MANIFEST.MF -- i think > that's great. I'm arguing FOR putting it in the filename. But this > is all silly, since Oracle clearly doesn't care about things that make > life easy :) > > ms > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
