Hmm, this is as true that we break a lot of things in the pom area, including the way we do rely on the namespace and schema so starting fresh is actually positive IMHO. Must not be a "per version" rule but there the amount of change in the spirit are worth it IMHO.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Javaccino founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) Le dim. 5 avr. 2026 à 17:48, Martin Desruisseaux via dev < [email protected]> a écrit : > Le 05/04/2026 à 16:19, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit : > > > side note: I can hear we mitigate the breaking changes now and keep it > > for next time but it is going back to fall from higher later so we > > must decide now how we'll solve the drop of <module> now IMHO and > > namespace/modelVersion is a clean way to do it. > > Yes, but whether we change the namespace for Maven 4 does not impact > whether we will need to do another change for Maven 5. If the POM schema > of Maven 5 has incompatible changes compared to any previous versions, > including Maven 4, we will need to consider a namespace change anyway. > Changing the namespace of Maven 4 will not give us more flexibility for > Maven 5. > > Like Java packages, as long as the changes are compatible, we keep the > same namespace. We should change the namespace only the first time that > a version is released with incompatible changes. This is not yet the > case of Maven 4. > > Martin > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
