Le mercredi 24 août 2016 11:29:26 Fred Cooke a écrit : > Someone nailed it when they said it'd be two big decisions, one for JRE one > for MVN. > > But here's the reality: People are just going to grab and use "the latest", > whatever it is. > > What does that mean? We'll probably start seeing dependencies we can't > consume, but want to, and otherwise could. > > A good library author/maintainer will dodge this bullet for their > downstream users, but some won't care, or will be lazy, or will get annoyed > running N versions of Maven. +1 that's exactly what I fear: we'll be in a bad situation
> > There's some great discussion further up about splitting things sideways. I > think that's the line this has to take. > > In terms of a chunk of code that I want to leverage, I don't care much > about it aside from its dependency tree and the classes within. > > Keep this behaviour, somehow. > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Christian Schulte <c...@schulte.it> wrote: > > Am 08/24/16 um 00:57 schrieb Paul Benedict: > > > escape hatch here. If a client can't understand what's being specified, > > > then what else can be done but fail? > > > > That's what caught my attention as well. Is there anyone around knowing > > about any kind of software which can handle forward compatiblity in a > > way I could learn from? > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Christian > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
