[
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MARTIFACT-35?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=169611#action_169611
]
Jason Chaffee commented on MARTIFACT-35:
----------------------------------------
Ok, this is the dialogue I was hoping for. :)
Again, I fully understand not wanting to allow arbitrary version schemes...I
really do. I have even tried to convince the powers to be use the current
maven versioning system. However, sometimes it is very hard to convince people
it is the right way to go as they are "stuck" in what they are used to and have
known. However, it is much easier to convince them to use OSGI or a standard
like that as they already trying to get their particular industry to move
towards OSGI. Therefore, if maven moves to using a documented standard
versioning nomenclature I think that will solve their problem.
> Allow the ability to "plugin" or "inject" different versioning implementations
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MARTIFACT-35
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MARTIFACT-35
> Project: Maven Artifact
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.0
> Reporter: Jason Chaffee
>
> Currently, maven's versioning for snapshot builds is
> ${timestamp}-${build.number}. However, it is often the case that companies
> have their own versioning requirements or conventions and there are different
> models for versioning such as OSGI, etc. For example, eclipse plugin
> versioning proposal has the following:
> the major segment indicates breakage in the API
> the minor segment indicates "externally visible" changes
> the service segment indicates bug fixes and the change of development stream
> the qualifier segment indicates a particular build
> This may result their snapshot builds take the the form of 1.2.1.v20050506 or
> 1.2.1.34 depending on they wanted to represent the qualifier segment. They
> could use the timestamp in the form "v20050506" or they could use a build
> number "34".
> Also, many times companies would like to utilize the build number in the
> final release version. For example, 1.2.1-SNAPSHOT is on build 34 when a
> release is done. Instead of making the final artifact 1.2.1, they may wish
> to make the final artifact 1.2.1.34 or 1.2.1-34.
> I think it would be ok for maven to only actually implement their default
> strategy, but I think allowing a different implementation to be injected
> based on the user's needs would be extremely valuable.
> Another option is change the way <version> works in the pom. Instead of
> entering a string, perhaps it could have child elements such as the following:
> <version>
> <major>1</major>
> <minor>2</minor>
> <service>1</service>
> <qualifer>${project.build.number}</qualifer>
> <separator>.</separator>
> </version>
> Note: qualifer may be the same notion as classifier. However, it would be
> nice to be able to specify to use a "." or a "-" or a "_" separator based on
> whatever format your company abides by.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
