Christian Clausen wrote:
> I suddenly realize that we use the two different styles of snapshot versions:
> You're talking about timestamped jars created with jar:deploy-snapshot while I'm
> talking about jars of a project with version x.y-SNAPSHOT (in project.xml) and
> deployed with jar:deploy. When using the style of snapshot version that I use,
> it's (of course) possible to have multiple multiple "snapshot versions" (one for
> each branch).

I'm very sorry for the confusion I've caused. I was not aware that
versions named <whatever>SNAPSHOT are considered snapshots by the
dependency verifier - I was positive that verbatim 'SNAPSHOT' version
triggers the check-on-each-build processing.

It's generally a good thing that snapshot per version is supported,
and this is the direction that I hope maven is going to take, but
the implementation is at best incomplete ATM. In the future,
<artifact-type>:deploy-snapshot should retain the version information
on the timestamped files (+ in the associated metadata file(s)),
and dependency specification format should be changed in a way that
makes in possible to state a 'snapshot' dependency leaving the
version attribute intact.

> In your case, there is another option for allowing multiple
> snapshots, if you don't like to change the artifact names to
> <artifact>-<branch>: Use different groups for different branches. So if <group>
> is your group, then your branched group could be named <group>-<branch>.

True enough, it's possible to get this behaviour this way, but I'd still
opt for artifact renaming -- you don't usually branch your organization
when you want to split your codebase into stabled & development
branches :-). I think of it this way - 'tomcat' group could deliver
tomcat-3, tomcat-4, and tomcat-5 artifacts, that are both legitimate
branches of the same product and should have distict 'snapshot'
versions.

R.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to