Re: [Proposal] POM compatibility extension

2003-11-19 Thread dion
Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/11/2003 03:36:19 AM: [snip] > No comma separated lists. Each element must be a specific version or an > expression like 1.4+ which of course means we must start defining a > standard versioning nomenclature. JDK1.5 has a way of specifying the required

Re: [Proposal] POM compatibility extension

2003-11-16 Thread Kurt Schrader
On Nov 16, 2003, at 4:20 PM, Brett Porter wrote: And definitely no CSV in XML :) +1 to that. -Kurt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [Proposal] POM compatibility extension

2003-11-16 Thread Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, 17 November 2003 3:36 AM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: [Proposal] POM compatibility extension > >

Re: [Proposal] POM compatibility extension

2003-11-16 Thread Jason van Zyl
On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 10:53, Vincent Massol wrote: > Hi core developers, > > In order to continue our separation of plugins from Maven core, we need > a way to indicate in a plugin the compatibility it has with other > artifacts, including other plugins AND with Maven core. > > 1/ For artifacts a

[Proposal] POM compatibility extension

2003-11-16 Thread Vincent Massol
Hi core developers, In order to continue our separation of plugins from Maven core, we need a way to indicate in a plugin the compatibility it has with other artifacts, including other plugins AND with Maven core. 1/ For artifacts and plugins, we can use of course the elements. I believe it coul