So will we have versioned filenames for maven builds and unversioned
ones for the rest?
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott M Stark
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 5:54 PM
To: Dimitris Andreadis
Cc:
JBoss.org development list; The Core
Subject: Re: Version numbers in library filenames - Bad
I agree, but this is the maven convention and as far as I
know cannot be undone short of hacking the jar plugin.
Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> 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
>