Jörg Schaible wrote:
Hi Henri,
Henri Yandell wrote on Friday, March 03, 2006 5:33 AM:
On 2/27/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote:
Hiya,
The directory project depends on commons-daemon 1.0.1 and we had to
update the maven2 repo with a temporary pom.xml to allow our recent
release to go through. I wanted to contact this list and make sure
the deployed pom is correct. It is located here:
http://test.maven.codehaus.org/maven2/commons-daemon/commons-d
aemon/1.0.1/
Also I'd like to make sure we can get m2 deployments working for
commons daemon from now on. I'm a committer but I wanted to ask if
it's ok to add a m2 pom alongside the m1 project.xml so we can
update the m2 repository.
If we start to add m2 poms to SVN I do think we should use the Maven
2 way to declare groupId, like this:
<groupId>org.apache.commons</groupId>
<artifactId>commons-daemon</artifactId>
I think it should be: org.apache.jakarta.commons
It's not the package, just a grouping, so let's get it right at the
ASF this time.
[I'm suggesting stuff on [EMAIL PROTECTED] that would force us to do
this btw :), we wouldn't have write permissions to org.apache.commons]
It is the recommended way to chose the package name as group id. If Jakartea
wouldn't have an own mirror into the repo at ibiblio, your upload would been
refiesed by the Maven team. And IMHO it is a good practice, because the user
must not guess about an arbitrary chosen groupId by the developers of a package.
Yes it is the recommended practice. In fact I think they will begin
imposing this for jars at ibiblio. I just finished maven2'ifying the
directory build and this was one of the *strong* recommendations made by
them. Perhaps they can chime in.
Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
