On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Alex Chaffee / Purple Technology wrote:
> But the Maven/Gump procedure is messing with that scenario a bit. Are > you saying that it promotes *automatic* updates of all clients when a > library is updated? In that world, Alphonse does not exist; he is > replaced by a script (or just an automatic Ant-based web download). Yep. One aspect of Maven [it's optional] is that all our projects build at midnight, a SNAPSHOT version is created and anyone who builds a project the next day is likely to get that new version [assuming they're working on something which has declared itself to use the SNAPSHOT]. I think it's probably better to be doing lots and lots of micro-versions, but that seems to cost a lot in terms of upgrading the version each module depends upon. The SNAPSHOT methodology is easier to work with and makes it break earlier rather than later. I imagine there's probably some big academic philosophical argument out there somewhere about whether breaking earlier is better or worse than breaking later. > This scenario is a little troubling, since it introduces the > possibility of semantic changes as well as syntactic ones. This > transcends the import issue. If this is so, is there a rationale for > it somewhere I can read up on? > > Note that I actually think this procedure is great, and can accelerate > development, as long as everyone involved understands the risks. Yeah, pretty much my view. Day to day is great, but every now and then the development-train crashes and we have to unravel pecularities. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
