right. When we do get to Jpa-3.0, we would just publish against a
version number that is late than what is currently there.. :)
And the reason you're seeing two directories for geronimo-spec is
probably because they changed the groupId of the artifacts. For
whatever reason.
So you might see older artifacts since Maven Central Repository never
removes anything, ever. So expecting this whenever I start using a
dependency I search for it in mvnrepository.com to see if it might exist
in different groupId/artifactIds. So if it happens to show up more than
once, and I try to look for the one that looks to be actively maintained..
Mark Struberg wrote:
--- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am Di, 11.11.2008:
This points out the possible problem that the jpa 1.0 spec
appeared to be part of the ejb 3.0 spec so I gave it a spec
version number of 3.0. Any suggestions about what to do
about this would be appreciated.
Do we really need to change anything?
Imho the current
<artifactId> geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec
with a
<version> 1.0
is somehow not really maven stylish, but it doesn't hinder us ;)
The version of the jpa-spec actually is 1.0 and we do not have any problem
other than the confusing term '3.0' in the groupId since this references EJB
and not JPA.
So I'd suggest to simply use
<version>2.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
and we're done.
Humm, btw, what's really confusing me now is the fact, that there are 2 specs
online:
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/geronimo-spec/
I've always used the geronimo-spec until now, and this doesn't contain the jpa
spec anyway.
So could someone shed a light on this for me (I'm not a geronimized one)?
txs and LieGrue,
strub
