Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3490.1106667153@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names? (Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names?
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com> writes: > Do the jar files now get installed as postgresql-80-jdbc3 or > postgresql-80-309-jdbc3? Currently they are installed under the same names they have on the FTP server, viz postgresql-8.0.309.jdbc2.jar postgresql-8.0.309.jdbc2ee.jar postgresql-8.0.309.jdbc3.jar This is good for identifying the upstream source, but it does seem like an awfully specific name to put into an application's classpath. Another issue is that the prior release still had a jdbc1 jar: pg74.215.jdbc1.jar pg74.215.jdbc2.jar pg74.215.jdbc2ee.jar pg74.215.jdbc3.jar > What about multiple versions installed at the same time? Is that allowed? Yeah. We already have these same concepts in place for shared libraries, where it's customary to provide (eg) /usr/lib/libpq.so.3.2* /usr/lib/libpq.so.3@ -> libpq.so.3.2 /usr/lib/libpq.so@ -> libpq.so.3.2 Basically I'm wondering whether there's an equivalent concept to libraries' major version number. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: