I'd recommend that projects using m2 wait for G 1.2, which will
hopefully be sooner rather than later.
I don't think it is a good idea for m1 projects to publish to m2
repositories (unless the Maven team comes up with a supported plugin
to do so).
If a project is using m2 and can't wait for G 1.2, then it should
setup a legacy repo and use the m1 artifacts.
--jason
On Jul 11, 2006, at 7:59 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 7/10/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that it's better to have different group ids for the M1
and M2
jars since their contents, maven wise, are quite different. IIUC, we
really shouldn't be putting M1 jars into an M2 repo.
So are you taking the position that we should not support Maven 2
builds with dependencies on Geronimo 1.1, or that we should support
Maven 2 builds with dependencies on 1.1 but only if they use the
"Maven 1 Group ID" for Geronimo and then change the Group ID when they
update to Geronimo 1.2?
My position is that if someone is using Maven 2 with dependencies on
Geronimo, they should use the "Maven 2 Group ID" for Geronimo,
regardless of which version of Geronimo they're depending on.
Or, perhaps you're saying that we should keep the JARs in a Maven 1
repo but put them in there twice, in one place for the "Maven 1 Group
ID" (for Maven 1 clients) and in a different place for the "Maven 2
Group ID" for Maven 2 clients (who need to point their build to a
Maven 1 repo but from what you've said that will work)?
Thanks,
Aaron
