+1 for o.a.isis.objectstore:dflt
2012/11/30 Dan Haywood <[email protected]> > OK, I've tried to pull together various opinions and updated the wiki page > [1] > > - yes, to idea of independent, more granular releases > - yes, flatten the modules at least as an interim step > - also, rename the groupId/artifactId's > - break linkage so that separate modules so don't share common parent > (ie are separate artifacts) > - perhaps... move the separate modules into their own git repos > > With respect to groupId/artifactId's, for those components (eg objectstore, > security) where there are implementations both core and alternate, we need > to decide between (eg): > > o.a.isis.core:objectstore-dflt > vs > o.a.isis.objectstore:dflt > > The former has the benefit that all the modules that come with core have a > common groupId; the latter has the benefit that all implementations, > irrespective of whether they are core or not, have the same groupId. In > other words, does groupId represent a packaging, or does it represent > common functionality? > > In the wiki page shows, I've gone with the former. But I'm 50:50 on this > myself. > > ~~~ > Buried on the wiki page are some further questions: whether to retire the > html-viewer, the profilestore-xml, and the monitoring component. My > rationale for retiring html-viewer is that the wicket viewer is similar but > superior; I don't think profilestore-xml makes sense for webapp viewers (it > might have made sense for dnd viewer in client/server, but we've already > removed remoting) ; and monitoring I think is a vestige of the remoting > should also be removed. But we don't necessarily need to come to an > agreement on these points (though opinions would be good). > > Thanks, all > Dan > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ISIS/Make+releases+easier+and+more+frequent >
