I'd say o.a.j.c, but really it doesn't matter. Pick one and use it consistently.
If you use o.a.c, you will have to share with anything else "commons" at Apache. Same deal that has been traded off for the Java package before. It's really not a big deal. - Brett Dennis Lundberg wrote: > Henri Yandell wrote: >> 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-daemon/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. > > This page [1] says to use the package, but I have taken this question > over to [email protected] [2] to get this clarified. Will post the > result back here later. > > <snip/> > > > [1]http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-naming-conventions.html > [2]http://www.nabble.com/What-M2-groupId-should-we-use-in-Jakarta-commons--t1220408.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
