On 5/5/10 11:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi Richard,
I prefer to have seperated groupId to avoid to have too much jar in the same
directory on the maven repo.
I think that it's easier and more well sorted using groupId directory.
IC. We make it more difficult for us to remember so the server has an
easier time... ;-)
-> richard
Regards
JB
-----Original Message-----
From: "Richard S. Hall"<he...@ungoverned.org>
Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 11:20:01
To: dev<dev@felix.apache.org>
Subject: Maven groupId question
I noticed while poking around Gogo that its Maven groupId is:
org.apache.felix.gogo
While most other subprojects are:
org.apache.felix
Apparently, Karaf also creates its own groupId. I guess I was under the
assumption that all subprojects were using the same groupId. It doesn't
seem necessary, even if you have multiple modules, since for example
iPOJO has multiple modules, but still uses org.apache.felix.
I realize the groupId doesn't really have much impact, but it does make
it somewhat confusing to know which is the correct groupId to use for a
given subproject. So, from that perspective it seems easier and more
consistent if every subproject just used the same groupId. Are there any
benefits of having separate groupIds?
-> richard
