Since everything we build is consumed by some other project/component, the proposal is moot. ;-) Components need a qualifier to make sure that nothing unstable ends up in the supported chain. I want to get to a point were we can say use a version range [1.0,1.1) and not worry about it any more. As for the versioning I agree we need some more transparency there, but we can't create a scheme that's too complicated for users to follow. Since an user doesn't have to find out which component is failing, it'll be reported against our 'global' affected version. Likewise the 'global' fixed version should report the released version. So version per component doesn't sound like a solution to me. As for the version of proxy in 1.0.0-CR1: $ svn cat http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/ejb3/tags/jboss-ejb3-as-i... shows jboss-ejb3-core-1.0.0-CR1 $ svn cat http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/ejb3/tags/jboss-ejb3-core... shows jboss-ejb3-proxy-1.0.0-Beta7 We really should be able to do a mvn dependency:tree remotely. Now the real problem is that Maven is a pain in the ... ehr bottom when it comes to version numbers within artifacts. If only we could specify [latest] in every source pom and the release pom would automatically update itself... So again it's the tool we use that lets us down. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4203049#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...