+1 to fix it at maven-core -D
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Florian Schätz <fscha...@assona.net> > wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 12.01.2017, 14:22 -0800 schrieb Benson Margulies: > > > >> I agree with them that this is counter-intuitive. The whole point of > >> -beta-1 is to introduce new, incompatible, stuff. The whole point of > >> that range is to exclude it. > > > > Doesn't 2.0.0-beta1 imply that it's a beta for the 2.0.0 release, so > > that the final 2.0.0 release will include everything that's in this > > beta, thus the range quite correctly contains it...? > > > The range [1,2) excludes 2.0.0. So, by your logic, which is my logic, > it should also exclude the beta. > > > > If the stuff from the 2.0.0-beta1 will not be part of the final 2.0.0 > > release, wouldn't it be better called 2.0.1-beta1? > > > > Just curious because we had some discussions about versioning strategies > > here, too, a while ago. > > > > Regards, > > > > Flo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > >
