I'm really fine with any prefix change, just as long as I don't have
to launch it with the current full package name :)
--
Arthur Kalmenson
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Charlie Collins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think anyone likes the idea of changing the prefix, but I
> think we have to, telling everyone to do their own "pluginGroup" is
> going to be a bigger pain than just changing the prefix, I think (if
> we don't change we will be constantly explaining this).
>
> How about "gwtm"? Short for the name of the project "GWT-Maven".
>
> Oh, and TotSP stands for "Temple of the Screaming Penguin" (screaming-
> penguin.com) - my blog/personal projects site that I so cleverly named
> about 10 years ago ;).
>
>
>
> On Nov 25, 3:18 pm, "Mirko Nasato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've tried to digest the idea of changing the prefix for a few hours
>> now, but it still doesn't go down well with me.
>>
>> Personally I would rather keep 'gwt' and add a pluginGroup to my
>> settings.xml. We (in my office) already have a gwt section in
>> settings.xml to declare a gwt.platform variable anyway.
>>
>> If there really is no other option than changing the prefix, then
>> honestly I would avoid anything with 'maven' in it. I mean: all maven
>> plugins have 'maven' in their name, but that's not a good reason to
>> have it in the prefix as well.
>>
>> I'd rather use 'tgwt' ('t' for TotSP, whatever that means ;-) or
>> something similarly short.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Mirko
>>
>> 2008/11/25 Arthur Kalmenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>
>>
>> > "mvn gwtmaven:shell" looks good to me, or "mvn gwtmaven:hosted" is good
>> > too.
>>
>> > I'm very unhappy with how the codehaus programmers did this. They
>> > should have tried to work with this project and combine efforts
>> > instead of going on their own and then using the same goal. Very
>> > frustrating....
>>
>> > --
>> > Arthur Kalmenson
>>
>> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Charlie Collins
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> I'm down with renaming the "shell" goal, sure, but how about "shell"
>> >> or "runshell" or something rather than "launch"?
>>
>> >> mvn gwtmaven:shell
>> >> mvn gwtmaven package
>> >> mvn gwtmaven test
>>
>> >> etc
>>
>> >> ?
>>
>> >> On Nov 25, 10:14 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>> While we're at it, then why not change the somewhat misnamed 'gwt'
>> >>> task to be 'launch' or 'hosted' or 'hosted-mode'; so we'd have: mvn
>> >>> gwtmaven:launch
>>
>> >>> My motive is that we're about to force everyone to re-learn how to
>> >>> launch, we may as well clear out the entire garage of target names,
>> >>> etc. :-)
>>
>> >>> -jesse
>>
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Darren Hartford
>>
>> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> > gwtmaven +1 (matches the project name)
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"gwt-maven" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/gwt-maven?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
