Leif Mortenson wrote:
Thanks for working on this. What is the standard for the groupid. I
have been looking at maven2 this week as well. The values in this
change are package like, but not quite the same as the package. In
some cases, org.apache.avalon.* is used where in others
org.apache.excalibur.* is used. As the groupid does not appear to
be a package name, should we be showing that all of these jars are
from Excalibur? Avalon no longer exists.
There is no strict standard (yet) for defining the groupId of an
artifact. I created the groupIds after the repository organisation where
I thought it made sense.
but eg containerkit/logkit AFAIK was always referred to as
"avalon-logkit" so i left it that way to avoid confusion.
Brett told me that they would want to move more to a package alike
structure, perhaps even set the groupId to the top level distinctive
java package in the artifact.
Do you want me to remove all references to avalon in the poms?
Jorg
FYI here's brett's email on this
Hi, I was just looking in:
http://cvs.apache.org/maven-snapshot-repository/
Is it possible to change the group IDs of the artifacts you are
deploying to the deeper structure?
I would imagine they would be:
org.apache.cocoon
org.apache.avalon
org.apache.excalibur
org.apache.excalibur.components
That just gives them that little more separation, navigability and
consistency with how we are going forward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
