On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:54:49 -0800, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 1/22/14, 2:43 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Jörg Schaible wrote:
Phil Steitz wrote:
On 1/22/14, 1:58 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Gilles,
Gilles wrote:
[snip]
It's a convention; the "component" part could be the component's
name
i.e. Commons Math could give "commons-math" as a base name; then
the
artefacts (archives and JAR files) would be differentiated
solely on
the version number:
commons-math-3.3.tar.gz
commons-math-3.3.jar
The current convention seems that the base name is derived from
the
top-level package name (which could indeed be mildly confusing,
hence
this thread):
commons-math3-3.3.jar
But since the top-level package is renamed with each major
version, it
is redundant to have the major number present both in the name
and in
the version number.
Old discussion! Please stop and search the archives, it's a
technical
requirement. Both names for package and artifactId must be
changed.
I did not mention modifying anything related to either the package name
or
the "artefactId".
It is neither obvious, nor so widely known it seems, that the file
names
absolutely must contain the "artefactId".
Looking at an URL like
http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=org/apache/commons/commons-collections4/4.0/commons-collections4-4.0.jar
I don't immediately see what would be the problem if the JAR file were
named
commons-collections-4.0.jar
rather than
commons-collections4-4.0.jar
Now, that there is a _convention_ to create such names by concatenating
the
"artefactId" and the version number, I can readily accept.
Gilles
[...]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
