But this is irrelevant for people not using legecy POM's (which I would think is the great majority). What would be the inconvenience of having defaut values? People wanting to use legacy poms just need to override those.
Thomas On 10/5/05, Anthony B. Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Such a default value would be bad karma, in the sense that you have no > indication which version of the POM (Schema) the POM instance was written > against. That stops you from doing intelligent support of legacy POMs, > especially if you make a non-backwards-compatible major version change. > Although it is a nuisance, it really is better for each POM instance to > explicitly state which POM version it is supposed to be valid against. > > Cheers, Tony. > > On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 12:51:42 +0100, Thomas Van de Velde > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Currently you are forced to define the modelVersion for each pom, even > > when > > declaring a parent. To me this seems to be a purely technical element > > that > > is of limited interest to end users. Would it not make sense to provide > a > > default value (4.0.0) if not defined explicitly in the POM? > > -- > Anthony B. Coates, Director > Information Design, Messaging and Management > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026 > -- > MDDL Editor (Market Data Definition Language) > http://www.mddl.org/ > FpML AWG Member (Financial Products Markup Language) > http://www.fpml.org/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
