Message: A new issue has been created in JIRA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- View the issue: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=MAVEN-1063 Here is an overview of the issue: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: MAVEN-1063 Summary: BaseObject id/name properties not necessarily reflected in schema Type: Bug Status: Unassigned Priority: Minor Original Estimate: Unknown Time Spent: Unknown Remaining: Unknown Project: maven Components: pom Versions: 1.0-rc1 Assignee: Reporter: Jeffrey Bonevich Created: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 8:16 PM Updated: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 8:16 PM Environment: any Description: There seems to be a pattern of the base POM classes extending BaseObject, which has name and id properties, but not necessarily declaring same in XSD or docs. Which is better to follow - code, XSD, docs (my gut sez go with the code)? Here are the inconsistencies I find: *Organization - has name, no id *Repository - no name or id *Branch - adding name and id means it == Version, but maybe it should? *MailingList - has name, no id *Contributor - has name, no id; adding id means == Developer *License - has name, no id *Dependency - has id, no name *Build - neither *Report - neither Does not necessarily make sense that they all should be - nor should code necessarily be directly reflected - in XSD. But for some (Organization, Branch, Contributor, License, Dependency?) it makes sense??? --------------------------------------------------------------------- JIRA INFORMATION: This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
