On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 12:01, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 5:40 AM Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Ultimately the PMC still needs to vote on the release, no? > > Hence I don't see what advantage there is in allowing different > > beta policies. [Of course, no component is required to provide > > a beta release...] > > What the proposal aims to avoid is JAR hell because of beta > > releases that did not change the maven coordinates. > > > > JAR hell will not happen (if using maven) when you do not change the > maven coordinates. Maven will resolve to only one version of the > given maven coordinates.
Huh? That can still cause jar issues, *precisely because* only one jar will reach the Java classpath. Suppose there is jar1 with API-V1. This is depended on by app1 and app2. Then jar2 is produced with API-V2 (not BC-compatible with API-V1) Update app2 to use jar2. Assuming jar2 is a later version than jar1, the classpath will no longer contain jar1. However jar1 contains objects needed by app1. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
