I am very tempted to reopen the trademark question here. It seems to me that this whole business ignores the groupId component of the name, which distinguishes pretty clearly, and I would argue is enough to avoid trademark dillution.
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> wrote: > I'd like to sum up the consensus we have hopefully reached already: > > 1. Make maven-plugin-plugin fail the build if the plugin being build does > not adhere to our convention (next minor version). > 2. Warn a user when a build is performed with a plugin which violates the > naming convention, just like with deps w/o versions. > 3. Create an appropriate enforcer rule. > 4. Break build with Maven 4 if an illegally named plugin is used > > Does that fit? > > Michael > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
