On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:16 pm, Michal Maczka wrote:
> >The only purpose of "type" in maven is to indicate how it is processed by
> > the runtime. (ie plugins get installed, jars get added to classpath etc).
> > It does not even specify that extension as there is a M-to-M between type
> > and extension. ie.
> I don't agree that this is the only purpose of "type".
> I think it's reasonable to have "type"  directory as this can separate
> artifact produced by various tools. ... I would like to have an exclusivity
> for adding artifacts to directories like (jars/sources/distribution).
> But I could accept if  somebody (some tool)
> is keeping its files in sibling directories. Also some "exotic"
> artifacts are making the repository harder to navigate.

Sounds reasonable. But maybe the term "type" is not the best term for this as 
it does not designate a "type" but a arbitary subdivision of space based on 
usage patterns. Not sure what a better term would be?


Peter Donald
"The true measure of a man is how he treats 
someone who can do him absolutely no good." 
         - Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) 

Reply via email to