On 3/31/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suppose the directory could be called 'action', but it seems > kinda silly to have 'action/trunk/action'. 'core' seems to be > what other projects like Cocoon, MyFaces, Shale, etc., are using,
I'm fine with 'core', as long as the directory name is similar to the name of artifact it's building. That's all I was saying. :) Each directory should either contain modules, or be one. In fact the build files can be moved up to 'action1' if you want. That's the normal Maven project structure, though it will probably break a few more things along the way. > I'm am kind of wondering if the other modules shouldn't be prefixed with > 'struts-action', > i.e. 'struts-action-extras'. It seems long, but it would be more accurate. I think they're fine the way they are, but wouldn't argue if the group wants to change it. > The other option would be to dump 'struts' all together: > - action-core.jar ... > I don't know if I like so easily giving up the Struts name though. Me, neither. Let's not. > This work is important as it paves the way to how we will handle Action 2 > modules. > It would be even nicer if we could follow or synchronize the product > structure/layout with Shale. Shale is not where you want to look for a good layout for Maven. ;) -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
