10

When I was releasing for scala 2.9.x, I simply had this line in my build.sbt:

crossScalaVersions := Seq("2.9.0", "2.9.0-1", "2.9.1", "2.9.1-1", "2.9.2")

But now, scala 2.10 is out, and I'm confused. My intuition was that I should have something like this:

crossScalaVersions := Seq("2.10.0")

But I noticed, that when I have scala version set to 2.10.0, sbt searches for artifacts ending with 2.10, not 2.10.0. What's going on here? What version should I use?

EDIT: Also, if I do publish-local, the artifact also ends up being suffixed by "_2.10", instead of "_2.10.0".

Rogach
  • 26,050
  • 21
  • 93
  • 172
  • i'm not sure, but these links should help: http://grokbase.com/t/gg/simple-build-tool/12bcfy6d5d/sbt-cant-compile-2-10-with-sbt https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/simple-build-tool/E0uSONFu7ew/b2k0AHTaw60J – xhudik Dec 22 '12 at 16:27
  • @xhudik - don't think so - the library itself compiles completely normally. – Rogach Dec 22 '12 at 16:47
  • did you check also comments, where states: crossScalaVersions := Seq("2.9.1", "2.10.0-RC1"), so in your case with different suffix e.g. "-RC5" - won't help? – xhudik Dec 22 '12 at 17:53
  • @xhudik - Yes, I looked at them. I actually don't use suffixes, I just use the single version (2.10.0). – Rogach Dec 23 '12 at 07:16

1 Answers1

6

The "Scala 2.10.0 staged" thread says

You can indeed simply cross version against 2.10.

Alexey Romanov
  • 167,066
  • 35
  • 309
  • 487
  • So I just publish only one artifact (2.10) and do not republish for later versions (2.10.1, 2.10.2, etc)? – Rogach Dec 23 '12 at 13:57
  • 2
    [This post](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/scala-internals/3R7xTJhcN0I/_drJ3xQFv8AJ) on the same thread and some answers are interesting too – om-nom-nom Dec 29 '12 at 15:19