Andrew Williams wrote on Saturday, April 28, 2007 7:06 PM:
> On 26 Apr 2007, at 13:20, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> Therefore the slots. The project itself can introduce them, if two
>> major versions can be used at same time. Think about a hypothetical
>> commons-logging 2.0 (it is
On 26 Apr 2007, at 13:20, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Jason,
Therefore the slots. The project itself can introduce them, if two
major versions can be used at same time. Think about a hypothetical
commons-logging 2.0 (it is discussed) that might have a different
API. I am quite sure Jakarta f
Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 4:41 PM:
> On 26 Apr 07, at 10:12 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
>> Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:21 PM:
>>
>>> On 26 Apr 07, at 8:20 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
Therefore the slots. The proje
On 26 Apr 07, at 10:12 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:21 PM:
On 26 Apr 07, at 8:20 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
[snip]
Therefore the slots. The project itself can introduce them, if two
major versions can be used at same time. Th
Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:21 PM:
> On 26 Apr 07, at 8:20 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
[snip]
>> Therefore the slots. The project itself can introduce them, if two
>> major versions can be used at same time. Think about a hypothetical
>> commons-logging 2.0 (it is di
On 26 Apr 07, at 8:20 AM 26 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Jason,
Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:52 PM:
On 26 Apr 07, at 6:05 AM 26 Apr 07, Arik Kfir wrote:
IMO, if the project claims to be backwards-compatible, then it
should
include the older classes. If they can ex
Couldn't you just use shade and/or uber jar to combine into a new one and
depend on that?
-Original Message-
From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 7:52 AM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: Dep to same artifact in different versions
Hi Jason,
Jason van Zyl wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:52 PM:
> On 26 Apr 07, at 6:05 AM 26 Apr 07, Arik Kfir wrote:
>
>> IMO, if the project claims to be backwards-compatible, then it should
>> include the older classes. If they can exist side-by-side, there
>> should be no issue.
>>
>
>
On 26 Apr 07, at 6:05 AM 26 Apr 07, Arik Kfir wrote:
IMO, if the project claims to be backwards-compatible, then it should
include the older classes. If they can exist side-by-side, there
should be
no issue.
I don't think you can force every project to do this, and I think
that users wo
IMO, if the project claims to be backwards-compatible, then it should
include the older classes. If they can exist side-by-side, there should be
no issue.
I see your point, though - I just don't think it is methodology-correct to
use different versions of the same project in one place, regardless
Grzegorz Slowikowski wrote on Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:47 AM:
> Hi
>
> Look at hibernate2 and hibernate3 artifacts. They have "hibernate" and
> "org.hibernate"
> groupIds respectively, so they can be used together (java package
> names are different too).
> This is IMO the proper way to do thi
Hi
Look at hibernate2 and hibernate3 artifacts. They have "hibernate" and
"org.hibernate"
groupIds respectively, so they can be used together (java package names
are different too).
This is IMO the proper way to do this.
While writing this mail I found:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAVENUP
Arik Kfir wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:15 PM:
> Doesn't the jmock2 contains the classes of jmock1 as well?
No. They should be used side-by-side.
And this is a general problem. No project will change their domain/packages and
adjust artifact names, simply because Maven cannot handle the
Doesn't the jmock2 contains the classes of jmock1 as well?
On 4/25/07, Jörg Schaible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:26 PM:
> On 25 Apr 07, at 9:00 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
>> Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:41 PM:
>>
Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:26 PM:
> On 25 Apr 07, at 9:00 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
>> Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:41 PM:
>>
>>> On 25 Apr 07, at 8:09 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>>
Hi devs,
how will Maven handle
On 25 Apr 07, at 9:00 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:41 PM:
On 25 Apr 07, at 8:09 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi devs,
how will Maven handle the problem of a dependency that should be
used in two different versions? This applies
Jason van Zyl wrote on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:41 PM:
> On 25 Apr 07, at 8:09 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> how will Maven handle the problem of a dependency that should be
>> used in two different versions? This applies to all project that
>> release a new (normally
On 25 Apr 07, at 8:09 AM 25 Apr 07, Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi devs,
how will Maven handle the problem of a dependency that should be
used in two different versions? This applies to all project that
release a new (normally major) version that can be used with the
old version at the same tim
18 matches
Mail list logo
