Hi, On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Alexander Klimetschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Generally I agree, but I know that something like jackrabbit 1.4.6 > containing a 1.4.5 core jar would be very confusing when users report > a problem. Couldn't we make an exception that the most important > component jackrabbit-core always gets the same version number as the > overall release - which would imply that sometimes core gets a version > number increase without an actual code change.
I guess we could do that. And in fact in any case the core version would need to be upgraded whenever any of the core dependencies (jcr-commons, spi-*, etc.) are modified, so the number of "extra" core version increases would probably remain quite rare. BR, Jukka Zitting
