On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote: > At any rate, I'd argue against using sub-groupIds just from a conceptual > overhead perspective and will likely continue to not use them myself since I > don't really see any added value. I believe all gogo java code belong to sub package of org.apache.felix.gogo. groupId play the same way as java package name. It's important to group similar function/class/module together. The group/package name should tell you where it come from/for without to see more details from artifact/class name.
Event 100+ file in the same folder is not a problem for maven, but not pleasant for human to navigate/maintain :( -Guo
