commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1084776 - /commons/proper/pool/trunk/pom.xml
Date Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:01:45 GMT
sebb wrote:

> On 24 March 2011 00:09, Niall Pemberton <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:05 AM, sebb <> wrote:
>>> On 23 March 2011 23:37, Simone Tripodi <> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:28 AM, sebb <> wrote:
>>>>> On 23 March 2011 23:14, Simone Tripodi <>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I think maven best practice would suggest to avoid groupId
>>>>>> duplication - for pool2 we agreed to switch to o.a.c groupId.
>>>>>> which problems are you speaking about? I'm asking because I would
>>>>>> have missed something I don't know yet.
>>>>> I just mean that the POM should specify the groupId even if it is the
>>>>> same as the parent.
>>>> I still don't understand the reason why it should do it, can you point
>>>> me to some doc?
>>> AFAIK, there is no such document.
>>> But it's important for people reading the POM to know immediately what
>>> the groupId is, without having to go searching for the parent.
>> There is no need to go searching for the parent. You can just look at
>> the <parent> element's groupId in the POM you're reading.
> OK, but I still think it's risky to rely on inheritance for such an
> important value.
> In theory, the parent might be changed, e.g. to the Apache POM, as
> used in Common Site
> Also, having an explicit value documents that the groupId is being
> intentionally set for this component.

The info is redundant, but I second Sebb here, simply because in Commons not 
every component has necessarily the same groupId. Currently we switch from 
the old M1-style groupId to this one only on purpose and therefore I prefer 
also the explicit definition here.

- Jörg

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

View raw message