Continuing the discussion that was started in the vote thread. there are a couple of things to note: - version numbers in jar file names make the lives of everybody much better the time that people composed their classpath manually should be long gone. It is fairly easy to construct a classpath with a shell script. It is not that hard to remove a previous version when you drop in the new one in the deployment directory
- Maven requires you to put the version in your jar file name. They enforce this for the obvious reason: you are 99% sure which version you are running and whether or not you might need to upgrade to a new version if one is available. The 'only-directory contains a version number' is flawed because I can still drop in any version of a pivot jar without even knowing that the wrong version is in place. - Version number in your jar name prevents classpath hell. Been there, and never wanting to go back. If you are worried about manifests needing to be updated, or other files... All those things can easily be updated automatically with the appropriate filtering during release build. Before you think we won't distribute through Maven, consider that for Wicket, about 85-90% of downloads are done by Maven (an estimate by me, might not be accurate) However, I am just a mentor, and I won't be voting on this issue. I just hope my insights are helpful in concluding this discussion. Good luck with painting your first bike shed! :) Martijn
