Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Sehrope Sarkuni
Тема Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix
Дата
Msg-id CAH7T-arK+d65TE0wDavnT4x5JOdUXWcRgpk_GnbR4SD4gG9iSQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix  (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix  (Mikko Tiihonen <mikko.tiihonen@nitorcreations.com>)
Список pgsql-jdbc
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com> wrote:
>* jre07-9.4.1207

This is not a valid Maven version.
Valid version should be <major>.<minor>.<patch><qualifier> where
major/minor/patch are numerics

It's still acceptable but it reduces all comparisons to pure string compares. As it's not the default style for Maven I agree we should avoid it then. 
 
We'd probably better follow "plug&pray" development style and go ahead
with jre6/jre7/jre8 then.

Yes I guess we don't really have much other choice besides complicating things quite a bit with separate dependencies for the API itself (and/or separate artifacts per JDK).

We should add a note to the README about this as well. I'm sure someone will eventually run into the issue of a dependency specifying a newer driver version with a lower JDK. Would be nice to have it documented somewhere that the solution is to make sure the top level Maven project specifies the latest version for the desired JDK version.

Regards,
-- Sehrope Sarkuni
Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/

В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Matthieu SANCHEZ
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Connection to PgSQL does not use SSL with JDBC driver 9.4 if the parameter is passed through Properties rather than URL
Следующее
От: Vladimir Sitnikov
Дата:
Сообщение: Code coverage tracking