"project" or "subproject" or "module" or "component" or ... whatever. :-)
/dev/mrg On 1/19/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sounds ok. If there are no other suggestions till Sunday, I'll use "unpublished". Andrus On Jan 19, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote: > How about unpublished instead of private? > > > On 1/19/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Jan 19, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: >> >> > Seems fairly logical, but Subversion allows us to move things >> around >> > if it needs to be changed again. >> >> True, just trying not to do it too often to avoid upsetting local >> Eclipse workspaces. >> >> >> > I am a little confused by the "private" in the names, though. >> Maybe I >> > just don't understand what you were trying to do, but the term >> seems >> > to imply non-open source to me, which of course is not correct. >> >> Interesting, of course nothing like that was implied. "private" here >> means that the module at deployment time will be a part of another >> aggregated module. Such module should not be published as a >> standalone module in a public repository and should not be imported >> by Cayenne users directly. Just like a "private" variable in Java. >> Again, "private" == "do not publish in the repo". >> >> But then, I am not sure what Maven recommended practices are in this >> respect. This is totally my invention coming of a need to provide >> user-friendly modules (cayenne-client, cayenne-server) - the idea >> that breaks neat and clean Maven picture of the world :-) >> >> Andrus >> >> >
