[jbosscache-dev] FW: [JBoss-dev] Version numbers in library filenames - Bad

[Galder Zamarreno]

Guys,

I think this affects our decision to put version numbers in the library filenames, am I correct?

Galder Zamarreño
Support Engineer
JBoss, a division of Red Hat


-----Original Message-----
From: jboss-development-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:jboss-development-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Andreadis
Sent: 20 September 2006 13:37
To: JBoss.org development list
Cc: The Core
Subject: [JBoss-dev] Version numbers in library filenames - Bad

I've seen a few cases where in repository.jboss.com the version number
for a library is included in the library filename,

E.g.
antlr-2.7.6.jar
addressing-1.0.jar
odmg-3.0.jar
quartz-all-1.5.2.jar
dtdparser121.jar
commons-lang-2.1.jar
myfaces-impl-1.1.3.jar

Even worse:
Cglib/2.1.0/lib/cglib.jar, cglib-2.1.1.jar

This is wrong, because
- whenever a library is updated we have to correct all explicit
references to it
- If you don't wipe your thirdparty on every update you may end up with
3 different versions of the same library and wonder for hours what's
wrong.

The version is encoded in the path and the library's
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF, not the filename, e.g:

apache-logging/1.0.3/lib/commons-logging.jar

For existing libs the harm is already done, but for new library
additions to repository.jboss.com, please have that in mind and remove
any version number from the filenames.

Thanks
/Dimitris

_______________________________________________
jboss-development mailing list
jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development