Re: V2.x not usable next to V1.x

If there is a problem with the way jdom2 was published to maven, this might
affect your stats?

On May 18, 2012 7:36 AM, "Rolf Lear" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Where were you for this discussion:
>
http://markmail.org/message/yjojwj26bwrxj5nx#query:+page:1+mid:buwh5fismpdahuoi+state:results
>
> ;-)
>
> So, the problem is as follows.... Maven imposes naming requirements for
> artifacts.
>
> 'We' decided that this is JDOM 2.0.0, not JDOM2 1.0.0, and also not JDOM2
> 2.0.0, etc. Thus, the *main* download will be the jar jdom-2.0.0.jar.
>
> This means that the maven artifact id *must* be 'jdom', not 'jdom2'.
>
> At the time I was not aware how hard/impossible it would be to have both
> jdom 1.x and 2.x sourced from maven....
>
> Maven is the 'secondary' distribution system for JDOM. The primary JDOM
> source is from www.jdom.org. The jars downloaded from maven should be
> identical to the ones from jdom.org.
>
>
> There are about 15k downloads a month from www.jdom.org of 1.x versions of
> JDOM.
> There are about 35k downloads a month from maven-central of 1.x versions
> of JDOM.
>
> There are about 10k downloads a month from www.jdom.org of 2.0.x versions
> of JDOM
> There are about 1k downloads a month from maven-central of 2.0.x versions
> of JDOM.
>
> The maven downloads show an *opposite* distribution of downloads compared
> to www.jdom.org:
>
> Here are maven's statistics for the three months Feb, Mar, Apr:
>
> version,count,%
> "1.1","92301","0.8971452713012695"
> "1.1.2","6406","0.062264904379844666"
> "1.1.3","3425","0.03329024091362953"
> "2.0.0","716","0.006959361489862204"
> "2.0.1","35","3.4019225859083235E-4"
>
> here's the graph....
>
>
http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p3&chs=400x400&chp=4.71&chco=326A9F|32349F|67329F|9D329F|9F326A&chtt=Downloads+From+Last%203%20Months|For+org.jdom:jdom&chds=0,92301&chd=t:92301,6406,3425,716,35&chdl=1.1|1.1.2|1.1.3|2.0.0|2.0.1
>
>
> JDOM 1.1 (released 2007) was downloaded 92K times in 3 months.
> 1.1.2 (released last Aug) downloaded 6.5k times in 3 months.
> 1.1.3 (released in Feb) just 3.5k times in 3 months
>
> Note that Maven does not even have JDOM 1.1.1 (from 2009) .....
>
> So, it shows a distinct 'inertia' in maven users. For all I know they are
> not even aware that JDOM 2.x has happened.... My guess would be that 90%
of
> maven users do not pay attention to their code....
>
> In a 'short while' I want to be in the position to say: "JDOM 1.x is no
> longer being maintained". It is not in *my* interests to do it.... it is
> essentially unchanged since 2007. If people have problems in JDOM 1.x I'm
> going to want to say "Upgrade to 2.x". I am targeting about December 2012
> for that....
>
> What all this rambling boils down to is:
>
> 1. I don't want to have to change JDOM's jar file name from jdom-2.0.x.jar
> to jdom2-x.y.z.jar
> 2. maven is the 'secondary' distribution system
> 3. you can ask your 'dependency' code to upgrade to jdom 2.x (they should
> be doing it anyway).
> 4. The bell has already been rung on this... I can't un-ring this maven
> problem.
> 5. maven users are 'lazy' about keeping in touch with their dependencies,
> and this will 'prod' them.
> 6. This is all a maven problem (by design or implementation, I am not
> sure)
> 7. maven 'users' (including apache commons) are happy to do their own
> thing anyway...
>
http://search.maven.org/#search|ga|1|a%3A%22org.apache.servicemix.bundles.jdom%22
> 8. maven is a PITA ..... :(
>
> As you can tell, maven support 'requirement' has not been a happy
> process.... in hindsight I probably should have just said no .... On the
> other hand, now that I have the automated build system working, it is not
> hard to publish to maven, as long as it conforms to JDOM's standards, I'm
> OK.
>
> Now that I have established my 'aversion' to the maven model, can you
> suggest a way out of this predicament that also conforms to the JDOM
> 'standard'... ? I promise to consider any suggestions....
>
> Rolf
>
>
>
> On Fri, 18 May 2012 08:29:28 -0400, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > For good or bad, I ended learning more than I care about Maven being the
> > release manager for several Apache Commons components.
> >
> > Our rule in Commons is that when you change a package name, you must
> change
> > the Maven artifact id.
> >
> > My suggestion is to do this in your POM:
> >
> >   <groupId>org.jdom</groupId>
> >   <artifactId>jdom2</artifactId>
> >   <version>2.0.2</version>
> >
> > Depending on your philosophy, you could also re-publish the Maven
> artifacts
> > for 2.0.1. But this is usually considered bad form because the POM needs
> to
> > change and you would then have 2 2.0.1 version with different pom.xml in
> > your sources jar.
> >
> > Gary
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> To control your jdom-interest membership:
> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]

_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]