Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cayenne.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of grobmeier@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.213.43 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4E3640F0.1020803@maniatis.org>
References: <A456C611-F5F7-4FF7-BC66-48443CDA20F7@objectstyle.org>
 <CAPFNckjH9MB+gPT8PUjF7E=0Mz4_DqOezdeSabtFbWO_eirrPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E3640F0.1020803@maniatis.org>
From: Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 15:29:48 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAPFNckgTqOg3PJF62xO5UD5e1ro48qMDZGiVf1+bzqp9KPBumQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Maven: Aggregation and unpublished modules
To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> I don't know that solves our problem from my initial understanding. Shade
> will rename the classes, where our main problem is our hierarchy of poms. We
> have an artificially flattened hierarchy to avoid end users seeing a regular
> maven pom tree.

With Shade Cayenne could have a regular maven pom tree in reality -
but for users who don't want that pom tree, Shade can create a huge
jar for them.

> I don't see how Shade will create anything but an enormous mess between svn
> source, jar output, javadocs and bug reports.

Actually having "unpublished modules" and "published" ones is not very
good also,  - imho. The current structure is very difficult to
understand. I know, you said only developers must care on it. But I
think otherwise, as this is open source. Every user is somehow a
potential developer too.

Cheers
Christian