So if we keep the Lucene version in only the packaging of the jar file, we have a source of end-user error and fragility in two ways: (1) the manifest file may not be available (the class files may be re-packaged in another app which didn't know to copy the Lucene manifest stuff, or unpacked)
I'd like to hear others weigh in on this repackaging issue. Is this a common practice?
Supporting users that repackage the JAR and potentially introduce incompatibilities will not be fun, and if someone reports they are running Lucene 1.5.3 I'd like to be sure I know exactly what that means. Having a Java class that contains the version information seems brittle to me, in that someone could repackage improperly.
JAR manifests, while certainly not leveraged this way by most, were designed to contain versioning information.
package org.apache.lucene; public class VERSION { // .. }
Why make life tough on users?
I'm merely discussing the options. We've had the version information in the manifest already and was wondering why that isn't good enough. You've certainly given some reasons why you feel it is not good enough.
What do others think?
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
