What I'm led to believe is that CamelCase is the convention for
artifacts, and that NUnit might be an exception. For that reason, I
have <finalName>nunit.framework</finalName> in the POM rather than
break the convention on the artifact ID.
Is everyone ok with:
* CamelCase as the convention for artifact IDs
* using finalName for NUnit rather than changing the artifact ID
* selection of (b) below
If so, I'll proceed to set this up.
Thanks,
Brett
On 16/10/2008, at 4:11 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I would like to start getting those into central.
I think there are these options:
(a) put them into http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 as is, ie NUnit :
NUnit.Framework
(b) put them into http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 with group IDs that
are more
maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework
(c) put them in a new repo such as http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet as
is, ie
NUnit : NUnit.Framework
(d) put them in a new repo such as http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet
with group
IDs that are more maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework
I'm leaning towards (b). Thoughts? Any other options I've missed?
I like (b) also, but I'm not sure about the capitalization... when I
install NUnit, the file in the bin directory is just
"nunit.framework.dll".
--
Wendy
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
