ppalaga commented on issue #904: Camel-Catalog-Quarkus: It is missing for release-1.0.0-M5 URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/issues/904#issuecomment-600760830 > Is there a specific reason for this? I wanted to follow the convention that all artifactIds start with `camel-quarkus-`. Having the same prefix for all modules in a source tree is quite common in the maven world. It is practical because e.g. naming clashes are less likely when jars need to be copied into a single directory (libs dir in quarkus or some sort of deployments directory on a web-container). Also Eclipse needs manual workarounds to import two modules from two separate source trees having the same artifactId. The old artifactId was used both in Camel and Camel Quarkus, IIRC. The proposed camel-catalog-provider-quarkus follows another naming convention but it is at least globally unique (which makes it acceptable). But I still wonder why that naming convention should be held superior to the local naming convention? Are all the catalog providers pulled by some agent who makes assumptions about their names?
---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
