commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Fox <bri...@infinity.nu>
Subject Re: [VFS] Maven groupId problem?
Date Mon, 08 Nov 2010 21:37:29 GMT
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
> Henning,
>
> it isn't as simple as you believe. See, for example, this thread:
>
>  http://marc.info/?t=128256609800002&r=1&w=2
>
> 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.

You would have to change your pom to select version 2.0 or 1.1 anyway,
so what if they have to edit one more line to fix the groupId?


>
> Apart from that, what do we gain? Noone has actual problems with the
> current groupId. It's simply that people don't like it.
>
> Jochen
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen
> <henning@schmiedehausen.org> 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 <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen
>>> <henning@schmiedehausen.org> 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: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message