On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Jason van Zyl <[email protected]> wrote:
> Give your projects different names. > We're not going to support duplicate artifactIds in the reactor. You can't > have two artifacts with the same coordinate and expect it to work. > Name your projects properly. > That's a very narrow-minded view. While best practice suggests to have some project identifier as part of the artifact id (e.g. tapestry-ioc, maven-compiler-plugin) it's quite possible that two completely separate projects would arrive at the same artifact id. The point of group id and version together with the artifactid is to uniquely identify the artifact, is it not? So using just the artifact id in Eclipse to differentiate between the project is a limitation. It's not just a problem with just weakly named artifacts - for example try working on multiple branches at the same time and importing them to the same workspace (I often rename the projects in Eclipse first; you could try that Andrew). If m2eclipse would just use <groupId>:<artifactId>:<version> as the Eclipse project name what difference would it make? I mean, Jason what's the reason to oppose it so strongly? Hopefully nestable projects in Eclipse would solve this properly somewhere around 4.x. Kalle
