On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 11:20, Aslak Helles�y wrote: > I noticed that xjavadoc wasn't tagged during the latest (pulled) > release. Whoever makes the new release, please tag CVS (xdoclet and > xjavadoc modules) as described here: > > http://maven.apache.org/development/release-process.html > > This also includes incrementing the version numbers in project.xml after > tagging.
Nothing was tagged originally, but it appears to have been since. However, now xjavadoc is being released separately it doesn't need to be tagged for the xdoclet release - it's sufficient to know which (release) version of xjavadoc it's built against (currently, according to the build scripts, that's xjavadoc 1.0). Even taking that maven release process you mentioned into account, tagging only the xdoclet module should still be enough so long as the dependency version is specified correctly in the relevant places. I don't see the dependency on xjavadoc mentioned xdoclet's project.xml, though. The only reason for tagging xjavadoc too is if we need to build against a specific CVS version, but in that circumstance we're better off to just do another release of xjavadoc first. Indeed, that was one of the hold-ups with releasing beta 3, in order to get xjavadoc 1.0 released first. I'm getting a real sense of deja vu here. I already covered all this in a mail last Wednesday; didn't that make it to the list? Andrew. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
