> Any reason to not define a property like > <cxf.version>2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT</cxf.version> in the top level > pom.xml and use that in all other pom.xml files?
Cause you can't do it. It won't work properly. The <version> part of the <parent> needs to be explicitly set so maven can FIND the parent pom.xml. Otherwise, it won't know if the parent is 2.0, 2.1, etc... Dan On Wednesday September 06 2006 1:07 pm, Andrea Smyth wrote: > Any reason to not define a property like > <cxf.version>2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT</cxf.version> in the top level > pom.xml and use that in all other pom.xml files? > > Andrea. > > Daniel Kulp wrote: > >Looks like it's pretty unanimous to go with a 2.0 version number. I'm > > going to update the poms to have the version number: > > > >2.0-incubator-M1-SNAPSHOT > > > >I'm also going to update the top level pom's distribution management > > section to reflect the new incubating repository guidelines at: > >http://www.apache.org/dev/repository-faq.html > > > >Dan > > > >On Friday August 25 2006 11:19 am, Daniel Kulp wrote: > >>Right now, the poms all are set to 1.1-SNAPSHOT. Since we have to > >> change them, what are people's thoughts on the version number. Couple > >> of options: > >> > >>1) 1.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT - since it's the first apache version > >>2) 2.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT - since both XFire and Celtix had 1.x > >> releases 3) Other options? > >> > >>I'm kind of leaning toward option (2). Actually, probably do: > >> 2.0-incubating-m1-SNAPSHOT > >>to reflect we're working toward milestone 1. Then hopefully start > >>releasing periodic milestones. > >> > >>Any thoughts! -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 F:781-902-8001 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
