That's "screwed" not "srewed" On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:13 PM, James Carman <[email protected]> wrote: > Henri, > > Since I srewed everything up (artifactId, EventListenerSupport, etc.), > do you want me to re-cut the 3.0-beta release? I think we should try > to make sure all this is fixed before we "release" a beta. > > James > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote: >> I was -1, but the below is a good argument. +1. >> >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:08 PM, James Carman >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Well, I think changing the artifactId right now would be the way to >>> go. That keeps things consistent. If we move to org.apache.commons >>> groupId now and don't change the artifactId and then later, if we >>> release 4.x, we change the package to lang4 and the artifactId to >>> commons-lang4 it will just be rather inconsistent. I move for >>> changing it to commons-lang3. >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We don't need the artifact name to necessarily contain the version name >>>> since the group is different. We already have achieved parallel installs >>>> just by doing that. >>>> >>>> I see two choices for the FQN: >>>> org.apache.commons:commons-lang3:3.0-beta-1 >>>> org.apache.commons:commons-lang:3.0-beta-1 >>>> >>>> Which do you favor? >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:01 PM, James Carman >>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes, it's >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.commons:commons-lang3 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > And we have abandoned commons-lang as the groupId, right? >>>>> > >>>>> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:57 PM, James Carman < >>>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> Ok, just wanted to make sure I wasn't off base here. Want me to >>>>> >> commit it (it's change on my local)? >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> >>>>> >> wrote: >>>>> >> > +1. One goal that Henri and I believed in is side-by-side / casual >>>>> >> migration >>>>> >> > of code. You can't do that with the same artifactId. >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:50 PM, James Carman < >>>>> >> [email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> >> All, >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> Changing the package name helps, but I think we need to also change >>>>> >> >> the artifactId so that when folks are using maven, they can have >>>>> >> >> both >>>>> >> >> lang3 and older versions on the classpath at the same time. >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> Thanks, >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> James >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> >>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
