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

[Dimitris Andreadis]

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
> >   
> 
>