On 10/16/10 11:02 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
If you are changing the groupId, there's no point in changing the artifactId.
See related discussion on [pool]. While we can avoid changing the
artifactId for 2.0 since the groupId change creates the necessary
separation of artifacts, we will need to do it subsequently. I
agree with James and others that it is best to maintain the simple
convention that at least for low-level components, we tie the
artifactId to the major release series.
Phil
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Phil Steitz<phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
I just created a dbcp 1.4 legacy branch, so we can now start work toward
dbcp 2.0 in trunk. Pool is already off to the races. As we have discussed,
I would like to start exploring bringing in the Tomcat jdbc-pool code, split
somehow between [pool] and [dbcp].
To get [dbcp] moving, I would like to make the following pom changes in
trunk:
0) change the groupId to org.apache.commons
1) change the artifactId to commons-dbcp2
2) change the pool dependency version to 2.0-SNAPSHOT
Both 1) and 2) may be controversial, so I want to allow people to weigh in
before making these changes. I know we like to avoid snapshot dependencies,
but I don't see any other way to keep the API changes in synch. Any better
ideas?
Thanks!
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
