Trust me the version number is not a problem.
If you want to inherit the version you are using ${version} and a parent
ref.
If you don't want to inherit the version you add a own <version> tag in
the pom.
Sean Schofield schrieb:
Good idea, but why we don't use the apache snapshot repository?
That's what I meant. I'm creating a myfaces dir in there for our use.
Why you create a myfaces dir in there this depends on the groupId?
I would prefer to stay the master pom in api.
The place of the master pom is not real a problem but changing the
artifactId or groupid would cause more problems.
Here is what I am proposing:
<groupId>org.apache.myfaces</groupId>
<artifactId>myfaces-tools</artifactId>
<packaging>pom</packaging>
<version>1.0.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
<name>MyFaces Master POM</name>
Note the version is 1.0. I don't want this to get confused with the
1.1.x versions we are using with the other modules. My thinking is
that we do *not* want the version number in the child poms.
So tomahawk will have
<parent>
<groupId>org.apache.myfaces</groupId>
<artifactId>myfaces-tools</artifactId>
<version>1.1.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
</parent>
This should work right? As long as the group id is the same the
parent ref will work. Also notice I changed the artifact id to
myfaces-tools. I think its more appropriate to have this here instead
of buried in api.
Since we need myfaces-tools for the archetpe plugin (and eventually
tobago plugins) why not just put it here?
The tools dir wouldn't be a natural place for the pom.
No one would expect the master pom there.
And maybe some tools has a dependency to api.
Bernd
Sean
