On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: >> +1 on the idea of having classifiers for the different versions we actually >> release as proper artifacts, and should be completely reasonable to enable >> via profiles. I'd have to double check as to _how_ people would specify >> that classifier/version of hbase from the maven repo, but it seems entirely >> possible (my worry here is about the collison with the -tests and -sources >> classifiers, which are standard mvn conventions for different builds). >> Otherwise, with maven it is very reasonable to have people hosting profiles >> for versions that they want to support - generally, this means just another >> settings.xml file that includes another profile that people can activate on >> their own, when they want to build against their own version. > > This was a question I had, maybe you know. What happens if you want to > build something like <artifact>-<version>-<classifier>-tests or > -source? Would that work? Otherwise we'd have to add a suffix using > property substitutions in profiles, right?
Well, we'd have to test if using <classifier> and <type> (http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-attached-tests.html) work as expected. Otherwise (an it may be easier/cleaner) just use 2 different versions for the hbase JARs, one for Hadoop1 and one for Hadoop2 (ie embedding h1 & h2 in the version). This may be easier and less error prone for users. Whatever we do should no be based on profiles as (AFAIK) the published POMs can not be consumed activating/deactivating profiles. And again, it would be great if all projects affected by this end up using an identical solution. thx -- Alejandro
