This is why the geronimo spec jars are named geronimo-<spec-
name>_<spec-version>_spec with a maven version indicating the
revision of the jar, not the spec.
We quickly found that despite our best efforts we often had to fix
problems in our tck-passing spec jars and after a lot of discussion
settled on this scheme.
thanks
david jencks
On Dec 17, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Ate Douma wrote:
Fixing the manifest configuration in the portlet2-api/pom.xml is easy
enough to do, but getting an updated jar distributed to the central
maven repo might be a problem.
Yes, that's why I'm asking here :)
AFAIK, the policy on the maven repo is *not* to override any earlier
"released" artifact.
The default answer to that is "just put out a new minor release".
But that's something we cannot do as this is not "our" artifact but
the
formal JSR-286 2.0 release :(
Maybe you know if there is some way around the "not override"
policy in
the central maven repo (like asking very nicely)?
The rsync to the central repo is managed by the repository team, so
maybe best thing is ask there.
Hmm, maybe they make an exception here, but nevertheless the wrong jar
is out there, downloaded from the central repo.
So, what if we would name the version 2.0a or something like that?
Or 2.0-final? So I guess we can come up with a name that makes sense
and gets accepted from the spec group?
In addition we can ask for removal of the faulty jar from the repo.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
[email protected]
