I would think again about the shortName. First is not very suggestive (name of what?) and second it will make people invent new names for the same stuff. I would go for something as <pkgArtifactId>commons-attributes-api</pkgArtifactId> and the value to always match the original package.
Alin On 3/13/07, Enrique Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/12/07, Alin Dreghiciu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Take a look at an example: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-240 > I had to add a new property: osgiVersion because pakage version does not > always conforms to osgi format. As in the example above the package > was 2.2but becasue of the pom version and snapshot the version will be > 2.2.0001-SNAPSHOT which is invalid. so the osgi version reuses the package > version and adds .0 So, I think I'm caught up on these threads OK. I merged the above latest round of thinking on the versioning scheme with the earlier thread regarding the shortName. The gist of it is that with: <properties> <shortName>commons-attributes-api</shortName> <pkgVersion>2.2</pkgVersion> <pomVersion>0001</pomVersion> <osgiVersion>${pkgVersion}.0</osgiVersion> </properties> ... <groupId>org.apache.felix.commons</groupId> <artifactId>${pom.groupId}.${shortName}</artifactId> <version>${osgiVersion}-${pomVersion}-SNAPSHOT</version> ... you get an artifact named: org.apache.felix.commons.commons-attributes-api-2.2.0-0001-SNAPSHOT.jar On the bright side, with the "SNAPSHOT" and the fact that "commons-attributes-api" is about as long as they come to begin with, I think this is a worst case scenario in terms of length. The manifest looked good, including the package versioning. Is that what we want? Did I get that right? Enrique
