this is messy, but here it goes
codehaus-parent
pom.xml
mojo-parent
pom.xml
both are released the same time. codehaus-parent has most of every
thing, mojo-parent, has mojo's specific like site, scm, etc
+ noRepository rule
any one can use codehaus-parent at their own risk, but I am very
confident codehaus-parent will work well since it is tested
by many of its mojo-parent's sub projects
thoughts?
-Dan
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Lee Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dan wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I think a "codehaus-parent" would be a good idea.
>>>
>>> But remember that the "codehaus-parent" would have to enforce the
>>> noRepositories rule too (or else codehaus would have to stop pushing
>>> repository.codehaus.org to repo1.maven.org
>>
>> the enforcement of noRepositories is how the debate started. and
>> there fore no point for seperation
>
> To Dan's point, "plugin-parent" would essentially be "codehaus-parent"
> without the addition of the noRepositories rule.
>
> Stephen wrote:
>> But remember that the "codehaus-parent" would have to enforce the
>> noRepositories rule too (or else codehaus would have to stop pushing
>> repository.codehaus.org to repo1.maven.org
>
> Isn't this the mojo community supporting the maven community and an example
> of supporting a wider audience than just the mojo community?
>
> What would be the negative effect of discontinuing the push to
> repo1.maven.org?
>
> Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
>
> Lee
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
