You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@etch.apache.org by scott comer <we...@mac.com> on 2009/05/20 17:12:01 UTC
naming of artifacts...
so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
trying to get this right in
release 1.1...
currently we build artifacts named like this:
etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
right? wrong?
scott out
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by Manoj Ganesan <ma...@gmail.com>.
Version number at the end looks better to me. Rick, is a classifier just
supposed to be 'classifying' information about an artifact, like -dev or
-prod?... in which case, does incubating at the end make sense from the
Maven perspective? Or is there no such hard and fast rule about that?
Manoj.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> rick! long time no see...
>
> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
> after the version number.
>
> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>
> scott out
>
>
> rick bolkey wrote:
>
>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>
>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>
>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>
>>> manoj? you there?
>>>
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>> --
>>>> james
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Naming
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
>>>>> for
>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>> Whilst
>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>> should
>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>> insists
>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the
>>>>> sake
>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>> i'd
>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>> take
>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>
>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>
>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>> stax,
>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> scott out
>>>>>
>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
there is a requirement for such marking.
agreeed +1 (for the mavenish way)
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
> +1 for after the version number
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:26 PM, rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org> wrote:
>
>> I would say put it after or leave it off. I would say leave it off unless
>> there's some Apache requirement to signify project status that I'm not
>> familiar with (not well versed here)
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:02 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> ok, i think i see. this seems to be an implicit convention going on with
>>> maven projects. i went
>>> back and poked around some more, and the maven projects were the only ones
>>> (of the few
>>> i looked at) that put -incubating at the end. strangely, not all incubating
>>> projects are marking
>>> their stuff -incubating, more like not hardly any.
>>>
>>> ok, so shall we let's be mavenish and put -incubating after the version no?
>>>
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
>>>> some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
>>>> the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
>>>> different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
>>>> classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen
>>>> "test"
>>>> used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
>>>>
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
>>>>
>>>> so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
>>>> we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> rick! long time no see...
>>>>>
>>>>> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
>>>>> after the version number.
>>>>>
>>>>> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>>>>>
>>>>> scott out
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>>>>>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> manoj? you there?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> james
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Naming
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project
>>>>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against
>>>>>>>>> others
>>>>>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>>>>>> Whilst
>>>>>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>>>>>> insists
>>>>>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> sake
>>>>>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>>>>>> i'd
>>>>>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>>>>>> stax,
>>>>>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than
>>>>>>>>>> incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since
>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by James Dixson <di...@gmail.com>.
+1 for after the version number
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:26 PM, rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org> wrote:
> I would say put it after or leave it off. I would say leave it off unless
> there's some Apache requirement to signify project status that I'm not
> familiar with (not well versed here)
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:02 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> ok, i think i see. this seems to be an implicit convention going on with
>> maven projects. i went
>> back and poked around some more, and the maven projects were the only ones
>> (of the few
>> i looked at) that put -incubating at the end. strangely, not all incubating
>> projects are marking
>> their stuff -incubating, more like not hardly any.
>>
>> ok, so shall we let's be mavenish and put -incubating after the version no?
>>
>>
>> scott out
>>
>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>
>>> uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
>>> some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
>>> the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
>>> different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
>>> classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen
>>> "test"
>>> used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
>>>
>>> http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
>>>
>>> so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
>>> we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> rick! long time no see...
>>>>
>>>> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
>>>> after the version number.
>>>>
>>>> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>>>>
>>>> scott out
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>>>>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> manoj? you there?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> james
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Naming
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project
>>>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against
>>>>>>>> others
>>>>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>>>>> Whilst
>>>>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>>>>> insists
>>>>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> sake
>>>>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>>>>> i'd
>>>>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>>>>> stax,
>>>>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than
>>>>>>>>> incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since
>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org>.
I would say put it after or leave it off. I would say leave it off unless
there's some Apache requirement to signify project status that I'm not
familiar with (not well versed here)
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:02 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> ok, i think i see. this seems to be an implicit convention going on with
> maven projects. i went
> back and poked around some more, and the maven projects were the only ones
> (of the few
> i looked at) that put -incubating at the end. strangely, not all incubating
> projects are marking
> their stuff -incubating, more like not hardly any.
>
> ok, so shall we let's be mavenish and put -incubating after the version no?
>
>
> scott out
>
> rick bolkey wrote:
>
>> uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
>> some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
>> the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
>> different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
>> classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen
>> "test"
>> used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
>>
>> http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
>>
>> so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
>> we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> rick! long time no see...
>>>
>>> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
>>> after the version number.
>>>
>>> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>>
>>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>>>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>>>
>>>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>>>
>>>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>>>
>>>>> manoj? you there?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> scott out
>>>>>
>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> james
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Naming
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project
>>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against
>>>>>>> others
>>>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>>>> Whilst
>>>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>>>> insists
>>>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> sake
>>>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>>>> i'd
>>>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>>>> stax,
>>>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than
>>>>>>>> incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since
>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
ok, i think i see. this seems to be an implicit convention going on with
maven projects. i went
back and poked around some more, and the maven projects were the only
ones (of the few
i looked at) that put -incubating at the end. strangely, not all
incubating projects are marking
their stuff -incubating, more like not hardly any.
ok, so shall we let's be mavenish and put -incubating after the version no?
scott out
rick bolkey wrote:
> uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
> some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
> the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
> different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
> classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen "test"
> used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
>
> http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
>
> so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
> we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>> rick! long time no see...
>>
>> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
>> after the version number.
>>
>> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>>
>> scott out
>>
>>
>> rick bolkey wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>>
>>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>>
>>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>>
>>>> manoj? you there?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> scott out
>>>>
>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>>> --
>>>>> james
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Naming
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>>> Whilst
>>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>>> insists
>>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the
>>>>>> sake
>>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>>> i'd
>>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>>> take
>>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>>> stax,
>>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org>.
uber and dev are most likely classifiers. they're basically ways to add
some more granularity to resolving the dependency. it's good to use when
the codebase really isn't different, but maybe build settings were
different. for example, with testng, you need to specify the "jdk15"
classifer to get a build that includes annotation support. i've seen "test"
used as a classifier if the package includes the test classes.
http://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Dependencies
so, a classifier would be nice if you want to re-release the build once
we're not incubating anymore, but the code hasn't changed at all.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> rick! long time no see...
>
> i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the end
> after the version number.
>
> can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
>
> scott out
>
>
> rick bolkey wrote:
>
>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>>
>>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>>
>>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>>
>>> manoj? you there?
>>>
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>>> --
>>>> james
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> quoting from:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Naming
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
>>>>> for
>>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>>> Whilst
>>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name
>>>>> should
>>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy
>>>>> insists
>>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the
>>>>> sake
>>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
>>>>> i'd
>>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>>> take
>>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>>
>>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>>
>>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
>>>>> stax,
>>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> scott out
>>>>>
>>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
rick! long time no see...
i've seen a few jar files put out there with -uber, -dev, etc. on the
end after the version number.
can you explain that a little more? what is a classifier?
scott out
rick bolkey wrote:
> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>>
>> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>>
>> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>>
>> manoj? you there?
>>
>>
>> scott out
>>
>> James Dixson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>>> --
>>> james
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> quoting from:
>>>>
>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Naming
>>>>
>>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
>>>> for
>>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>>
>>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>>
>>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>>> Whilst
>>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name should
>>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy insists
>>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the
>>>> sake
>>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>>
>>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------
>>>>
>>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative. i'd
>>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>>> take
>>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>>
>>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>>
>>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j, stax,
>>>> wstx, etc.
>>>>
>>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>>
>>>> scott out
>>>>
>>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> scott out
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 3:14 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> mvn install:install-file
> "-Dfile=apache-etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-incubating.jar"
> -DgroupId=org.apache.etch -DartifactId=apache-etch-ant-plugin
> -Dversion=1.1.0 -Dpackaging=jar
-Dversion=1.1.0-incubating
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
ok, here are the current artifact names:
ApacheEtchCsharpIncubating.dll
ApacheEtchCsharpIncubating.pdb
ApacheEtchCsharpIncubatingSrc.zip
apache-etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-incubating.jar
apache-etch-compiler-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-compiler-1.1.0-incubating.jar
apache-etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-incubating.jar
apache-etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-incubating.jar
apache-etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-incubating.jar
apache-etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip
apache-etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-incubating.jar
currently the jars would be installed for maven with flags like these:
mvn install:install-file
"-Dfile=apache-etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-incubating.jar"
-DgroupId=org.apache.etch -DartifactId=apache-etch-ant-plugin
-Dversion=1.1.0 -Dpackaging=jar
source zips are installed like this:
mvn install:install-file
"-Dfile=apache-etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-incubating-src.zip"
-DgroupId=org.apache.etch -DartifactId=apache-etch-ant-plugin
-Dversion=1.1.0 -Dpackaging=jar -Dclassifier=sources
are these the appropriate flags? incubating doesn't appear except in the
file name.
scott out
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 3:03 AM, rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org> wrote:
>
>> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
>> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
>>
>
> No, this is incorrect. Classifiers are reserved for other use, such as
> javadoc, sources, and various secondary artifacts in some module types
> (wars, ears, IIRC). Sticking in "incubating" in a classifier will not
> be a good idea.
>
> Cheers
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 3:03 AM, rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org> wrote:
> Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
> after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
No, this is incorrect. Classifiers are reserved for other use, such as
javadoc, sources, and various secondary artifacts in some module types
(wars, ears, IIRC). Sticking in "incubating" in a classifier will not
be a good idea.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by rick bolkey <ri...@bolkey.org>.
Maven wise, "incubating" becomes the classifier of the artifact if it's
after the version number. Kind of makes sense.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:38 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
>
> which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
>
> i've been making the examples work all day now.
>
> manoj? you there?
>
>
> scott out
>
> James Dixson wrote:
>
>> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
>> --
>> james
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> quoting from:
>>>
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Naming
>>>
>>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
>>> for
>>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>>
>>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>>
>>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
>>> Whilst
>>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name should
>>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy insists
>>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the
>>> sake
>>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>>
>>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>>
>>> ------------------
>>>
>>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative. i'd
>>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you
>>> take
>>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>>
>>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>>
>>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j, stax,
>>> wstx, etc.
>>>
>>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>> James Dixson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we
>>>>> are
>>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>>
>>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> scott out
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
oh, yes, the installers are named that way. ugh.
which way to go? does it matter that they are inconsistent?
i've been making the examples work all day now.
manoj? you there?
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
> I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
> --
> james
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> quoting from:
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>
>>
>> Naming
>>
>> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible for
>> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
>> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>>
>> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
>> |apache-foo-bar|.
>>
>> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention. Whilst
>> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name should
>> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy insists
>> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the sake
>> of readability are usually acceptable).
>>
>> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
>> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
>> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative. i'd
>> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you take
>> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>>
>> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>>
>> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j, stax,
>> wstx, etc.
>>
>> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>>
>> scott out
>>
>> James Dixson wrote:
>>
>>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
>>>> trying to get this right in
>>>> release 1.1...
>>>>
>>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>>
>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>>
>>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>>
>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>>
>>>> right? wrong?
>>>>
>>>> scott out
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by James Dixson <di...@gmail.com>.
I am fine either way. I did apache-etch-1.0.2-incubating last time.
--
james
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> quoting from:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>
>
> Naming
>
> Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible for
> the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against others
> issuing artifacts with the same name.
>
> For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
> |apache-foo-bar|.
>
> Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention. Whilst
> in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release name should
> contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator policy insists
> that it must also contain |incubating| (though small variations for the sake
> of readability are usually acceptable).
>
> For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
> |foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
>
> ------------------
>
> apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
> artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative. i'd
> rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where you take
> off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
>
> many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
>
> velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j, stax,
> wstx, etc.
>
> the majority have it last when it appears at all.
>
> scott out
>
> James Dixson wrote:
>>
>> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
>>> trying to get this right in
>>> release 1.1...
>>>
>>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>>
>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>>
>>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>>
>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>>
>>> right? wrong?
>>>
>>> scott out
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
quoting from:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
Naming
Apache releases should contain the full name of the project responsible
for the release. This ensures that trademark law can be used against
others issuing artifacts with the same name.
For example, one good name for product bar Apache Foo Project would be
|apache-foo-bar|.
Once a podling graduations, it should adopt this naming convention.
Whilst in the incubator, practice is a little different. The release
name should contain the podling name and may contain apache. Incubator
policy insists that it must also contain |incubating| (though small
variations for the sake of readability are usually acceptable).
For example, for podling foo, both |apache-foo-incubating| and
|foo-incubating| would be acceptable names.
------------------
apache-etch-blah-incubating would seem to be indicated for all our
artifacts, with etch-blah-incubating being an acceptable alternative.
i'd rather the version be at the end myself (except for source, where
you take off .jar and stick on -src.zip.
many projects i've looked at use the blah-ver.jar syntax:
velocity, junit, various ant tasks, commons, dom4j, jakarta, log4j,
stax, wstx, etc.
the majority have it last when it appears at all.
scott out
James Dixson wrote:
> I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
>> trying to get this right in
>> release 1.1...
>>
>> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>>
>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>>
>> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>>
>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
>> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>>
>> right? wrong?
>>
>> scott out
>>
>>
>>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by scott comer <we...@mac.com>.
also, i forgot, but in my previous message the recommendation is by
graduation we have apache-etch instead of etch. we
might as well do that now...
while, we're at it...
it isn't customary to include a version number in the name of a dll, but
we have the potential for dll from multiple
bindings now.
i propose we rename the csharp binding's Etch.dll to be
ApacheEtchCsharpIncubating.dll
and then the c binding, when we build it, could be
ApacheEtchCIncubating.dll
scott out
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by James Dixson <di...@gmail.com>.
I think it needs to be 1.1.0-incubating rather than incubating-1.1.0.
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
> trying to get this right in
> release 1.1...
>
> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>
> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>
> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>
> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>
> right? wrong?
>
> scott out
>
>
Re: naming of artifacts...
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
>From Incubator's point of view it doesn't matter where "incubating" is
in the names, but if you want to play nice with Maven users, I suggest
that you put it in the "version" and at the "end". This allows the
artifactId and groupId to remain intact when you leave Incubator, and
Maven's version resolution (latest, SNAPSHOT and such) can only handle
non-numbers after the formal version.
Cheers
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:12 PM, scott comer <we...@mac.com> wrote:
> so there was a discussion awhile back about artifact names. since we are
> trying to get this right in
> release 1.1...
>
> currently we build artifacts named like this:
>
> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-ant-plugin-1.1.0.jar
> etch-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-csharp-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-compiler-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-runtime-1.1.0.jar
> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-xml-compiler-1.1.0.jar
>
> i'm thinking this needs to be something like this:
>
> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-ant-plugin-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-csharp-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-java-runtime-incubating-1.1.0.jar
> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0-src.zip
> etch-xml-compiler-incubating-1.1.0.jar
>
> right? wrong?
>
> scott out
>
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug