commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Wiedmann <>
Subject Re: [VFS] Maven groupId problem?
Date Mon, 08 Nov 2010 14:43:30 GMT

it isn't as simple as you believe. See, for example, this thread:

The conclusion was, as I read it at the time, that you should expect
that users still have to edit their respective pom files. Which is a
blocker, IMO.

Apart from that, what do we gain? Noone has actual problems with the
current groupId. It's simply that people don't like it.


On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen
<> wrote:
> I don't get it. Sorry. :-)
> So maven1 kind of added ad-hoc groups. They chose to use the same as
> the artifactId as the groupId when they constituted that back in the
> maven1 days. That turned out to be suboptimal. But some artifacts that
> were in the maven1 tree (most of commons) ended up in the commons-*
> locations.
> Pretty much everyone agrees that this was a mistake and these
> artifacts should have been put into org.apache.commons. However, they
> were not. Why should be stay locked into these mistakes forever?
> Maven offers a relocation mechanism. So we use it and put the new
> releases into the more sane location which is
> org.apache.commons:commons-vfs. Life goes on afterwards. Relocation
> helps people to transition.
> I love backwards compatibility as the next guy, but we do have to move
> on at some point. JDK 1.3 and Maven 1 are gone for five+ years now.
> Everyone who is still using them will not upgrade anyway. Not
> leveraging what exists in 2010 seems to wrong to me. Let's acknowledge
> mistakes of the past and move on.
> +1 to org.apache.commons:* for all new releases. +1 to "JDK5+ (even
> though I would prefer JDK6+) for all new releases.
> -h
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 18:48, James Carman <> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen
>> <> wrote:
>>> This is an old, buggy location and it should be cleaned up over time.
>>> Being locked into the mistakes of the past because some tool can not
>>> understand it, doesn't seem to be reasonable to me.
>> The cat's sort of out of the bag now.  It pisses people (well at least
>> it does me) off when you start moving stuff around on them.  All of a
>> sudden, you start seeing "blah blah moved to blah blah" in your build
>> output.  VFS apparently wasn't a Maven 2 project at the time it was
>> released.  The source distribution doesn't contain a pom.xml file.
>> I'm more worried about how the tag is out of sync with the "official"
>> released source.  That's not good.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message