Hi all, wanted to pick your brains about something.
A fellow (new to the team) developer was shocked we did not version our release artefacts. We pretty much just give the latest war file (with the same name each time) to the infrastructure team to deploy. Is that really bad? Its not that I'm completely ignorant to the practice, its just that doing <major>.<minor>.<patch> naming of the artefact seems to be a bit old school. Companies who sell software for example (like Oracle) where there is multiple versions of their product in the wild and its possible that a particular customer will need a specific patched version. We could do it I guess at the cost of a little bureaucratic overhead, but it would be good to get some opinions so I'm armed at the next retro as to why we don't do it. Cheers Rakesh -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
