Hello, I prefer including the version. Consider the following situation. Package foo has version A and B, both installing to path ~/.guix-profile/share/java/ (symlink to store). When the user installs both version A and B, there will be a conflict. Please note that I do not know java very well. Will those jar files be installed to different locations instead of ~/.guix-profile/share/java/ if we switch to maven later?
By the way, does java / maven has something similar to so name for abi compatibility? Thanks, Alex Hartmut Goebel <h.goe...@goebel-consult.de> writes: > Hi, > > as I'm going to release patches for some java packages, I'd like to > get consent on one point: > > Should java .jar-filenames include the version? > > This only effects those .jar for which there is no build.xml (or > equivalent) is present and thus #:jar-file is to be specified. > > The jar-files currently packaged do not include the version, but most . > jar-files build using a build.xml or maven .pom seam to include it. > OTOH, the version is already in the prefix, thus it is redundant. > > What do you think? > > (I personally do not care much, I just want to avoid duplicate work.)
