aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <>
Subject Re: Aries release - the shape of repo org/apache/aries
Date Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:06:34 GMT
Maven insists on naming the jar artifactid-version.jar since we wanted  
our jars to follow the bundle_symolicname-version.jar convention it  
forces duplication in the artifact id.

This is why I was asking if we could get the jar name to be generated  
from the group and artifact id on IRC last week.


On 9 Mar 2010, at 18:49, Kevan Miller <> wrote:

> On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:56 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>> I'm trying to understand what the org/apache/aries maven repo space
>> will look like once we release our 0.1 artifacts.
>> AIUI, and based on release discussions so far, when we release the
>> artifacts they will be pushed up to Nexus by the maven release  
>> plugin.
>> Those artifacts in turn come from the local .m2 repo put there by mvn
>> install.
>> So I cleaned out my .m2/repository/org/apache/aries then did a mvn
>> clean install to see what was there. I think we need to move things
>> about a bit (or rather rename some artifactIds) to make our
>> artifactIds and groupIds consistently named. Later, after the 0.1
>> release, we could also improve things to make sure there is a
>> consistent relationship between source tree location and location of
>> the built artifact in the repo.
>> A built artifact is always given the name of the artifactId - and  
>> even
>> if there were a way of changing that, from an ease of understanding
>> point of view, we probably shouldn't as that is what anyone who uses
>> maven assumes.
>> Many of our bundle artifacts (all except the samples) follow the
>> <package name>-<version> naming convention which means their
>> artifactIds also do - this is the same as the bundle artifacts of the
>> Felix subprojects. So I suggest we follow the same pattern applying  
>> it
>> across the samples too. This has the effect of giving us uniquely
>> named artifactIds across the whole project (e.g. we don't have two
>> artifacts called "api" for example) - which means m2eclipse is happy
>> by default.
> I seem to recall some discussion on this previously, but can't say I  
> came away with an understanding. So, I'll ask my naive question...  
> What's the motivation for naming artifactid's this way? e.g.:
> org/apache/aries/blueprint/org.apache.aries.blueprint.core/0.1- 
> incubating-SNAPSHOT/org.apache.aries.blueprint.core-0.1-incubating- 
> --kevan

View raw message