> This discussion about respins is really strange to me. I've been cutting > releases, with Maven, at Apache, for years now. And all of them have reused > version numbers for respins. And all of them have carefully used staging > technology (old: directories, new: Nexus) to ensure that artifacts don't > escape to the wild until they pass the vote.
But they have to be in the wild in order to test (especially plugins). This adds a barrier to test for external people in a corporate environment, and can cause mishaps if one library delivered with a plugin is not cleaned up correctly from a MRM, causing the old failed version to be served up to clients. Basically IMHO reusing version numbers violates maven rule #1 releases never change. Personally I wouldn’t care if 3.3.0 is called 3.3.0-7 or 3.3.0-24 so long as it is the official "3.3.0". After all isn’t this what the buildnumber is for? +1 no reusing version numbers (non binding) (but I am against skipping x.y.z versions - e.g. there should not be a gap from 3.2.12 to 3.3.6 ) /James
