Like I said there is nothing that **could** prevent people from doing a
1-1 mapper between a simple-style to complex-style, all that it's
important is that there is 1 format in the repositories. If this could
help speed up the process of *writing* the code I say it might be welcome.
One point though, having seen the humongous xsd for the pom, it's not at
all trivial task and it could be more trouble then worth (then again, it
could be tackled in many ways, one namespace for a simplified pom,
separate namespaces for different things/different plugins). All in all,
it *could* be done, I don't know if it *should* be done.
The things we end users and you developers should weigh in are these:
If you simplify the pom perhaps you could gain more users.
If you develop this namespace approach, we'd have to tech the parsers
how to deal with these new schemas, we'd have to write new schemas, we'd
have a bunch of bugs which would lead to bad user experience and
probably a drop in early adopters (like me).
I'd go with the more gradual approach, open the infrastructure for use
cases where the pom is a flexible, extensible, syntacticly open model.
Build the infrastructure and enforce community guidelines for public
repositories.
That would be what I'd do.
Srgjan Srepfler
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
