I know that this doesn't directly address the question, but I had been working with the JAXB/Codemodel group on some decent naming standards for artifactId/groupId combinations as they relate to projects and sub-projects. Since the whole naming thing came up, I though that I'd post my little writeup and see if I could get some feedback on what everybody thinks in terms of the conventions.
http://kickstyle.net/pebble/2006/10/27/1162015380000.html Thanks. On 11/7/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/7/06, jiangshachina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But at Maven central repository, http://www.ibiblio.org/maven2/ > I don't find any accurate regular. > For example, Apache Commons projects aren't grouped as org.apache, or > org.apache.commons, or apache.commons, even not commons. > Each Commons project is individual groupId. That (individual group ids) was the convention for Maven 1. Changing to org.apache.commons is under discussion on the Commons development list. Because the Commons libraries are so widely used, it needs to be done very carefully. > Why Maven central repo classifies jars as the regular? > And how do I name goupId for 3rd-part files not hosted by Maven central > repo? There are some suggestions for Sun's jars, here: http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-coping-with-sun-jars.html If it's not one of those, I usually use the package name or the company's domain name (reversed) for the groupId. -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Gregory Kick http://kickstyle.net/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
