Any news on this item? Does my last suggestion seem reasonable/doable? We'd like to begin making the 2.0 spec updates and get an artifact published to the maven repo asap. -Jeremy
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Jeremy Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks, David, for populating the repository and for your willingness to > handle commits. > The naming issue is quite a quandary. Would this approach (or derivation > of) work? a) Add a JPA 1.0 spec to the repo - this is not necessary, but > may be good for the sake of completeness. b) Use the new 2.0 repo for 2.0 > spec work. c) For JPA 3.0, add a 3.0-SNAPSHOT version to > geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec, leaving the the current 1.0 version intact. > -Jeremy > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Mark Struberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> we have to use 2.0-EA-SNAPSHOT! >> >> At least '-SNAPSHOT' has to be at the end, because maven does handle >> snapshot releases completely different than tagged final releases. >> See [1], [2] + many more internal maven-details you do not want to know >> about ;) >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> [1] http://maven.apache.org/glossary.html >> [2] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-release-plugin/ >> >> >> --- Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am Di, 11.11.2008: >> >> > Von: Michael Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > Betreff: Re: Updating the JPA spec jar for JPA 2.0 >> > An: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Datum: Dienstag, 11. November 2008, 19:50 >> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Craig L Russell >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:28 AM, 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. >> > >> >> > > >> > > Yes, this would be the thing to do. >> > > >> > > The original JPA was released as part of EJB, which >> > had gotten to the 3.0 >> > > level. But JPA was brand, spanking new 1.0. >> > > >> > > The current JPA specification (JSR 317, now in Public >> > Review Draft stage) >> > > is being billed as JPA Version 2.0. So 2.0-SNAPSHOT >> > seems completely >> > > correct. >> > > >> > > So even though it's confusing because of the >> > original geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec >> > > nomenclature, I'd say we confuse things even more >> > if we change the artifact >> > > id or group id (again). >> > > >> > >> > That's easiest for migration. It's unfortunate that >> > geronimo-jpa_x.y_spec >> > doesn't follow the same pattern as the other geronimo >> > specs though. I have >> > no strong feelings either way though. >> > >> > We might want to keep the EA nomenclature so >> > 2.0-EA-SNAPSHOT or >> > 2.0-SNAPSHOT-EA could be the current version. Once the spec >> > finalizes >> > 2.0-SNAPSHOT seems fair. >> > >> > -mike >> > >> > >> > > Craig >> > > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> 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 >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > Craig L Russell >> > > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System >> > http://db.apache.org/jdo >> > > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >> > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
