On 28 November 2011 12:03, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > I don't think that is either an apache thing or a rule. It's more of a > commons best practice. It's one we strongly suggest for good reason, > though.
Yes, because commons components are generally low-level libraries which can be part of a dependency chain. > Make sure the maven artifactId (and probably groupId too) changes > correspondingly. This will allow older versions to coexist with new ones. Package name changes must be accompanied by Maven id changes and vice-versa to avoid jar-hell This is because Maven relocation does not work with Maven Central. > On Nov 28, 2011 2:52 AM, "Henri Biestro" <hbies...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Gary and Sebb pointed out that, per apache release rules, incompatible >> binaries require new package name (i.e. jexl3). >> My bad, sorry. >> Henrib >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
