Le mer. 5 juin 2019 à 16:47, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> a écrit :
>
> Ok, what about 1.2?

How is it different?

Gilles

>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 10:44 AM Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Le mer. 5 juin 2019 à 16:18, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > What happens if/when you want to release a 2.0-alpha1 in the future?
> >
> > Hmm, what happens?
> > [At point, we'd have renamed "o.a.c.compid" to ""o.a.c.compid2".]
> >
> > Gilles
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 6:53 AM Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello.
> > > >
> > > > Does someone see a practical way to automate package names
> > > > and source files conversions so that each all alpha/beta releases
> > > > can be used together (e.g. to compare their behaviours).
> > > >
> > > > I mean, for release version "1.0-alpha1", the top-level package
> > > > name "o.a.c.compid" would be turned into "o.a.c.compid.alpha1".
> > > >
> > > > This would also solve issues with compatibility checkers (with the
> > > > added bonus that JAR hell could never happen).
> > > >
> > > > Couldn't the "shade" plugin be put to use (so that all artefacts have
> > > > their top-level package transparently set to "o.a.c.compid.alpha1"
> > > > and all the tools operate on that)?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Gilles
> > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to