commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1424618 - in /commons/sandbox/privilizer/trunk: ./ ant/ ant/lib/ ant/test/ example/ maven-plugin/ modules/ modules/privilizer/ modules/privilizer/api/ modules/privilizer/api/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/weaver/privilizer/ modules/privi...
Date Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:43:56 GMT
No worries Jörg, I was just not aware of those additional steps/scripts.
From a pure maven perspective I would prefer separate groupIds but I get your arguments regarding
the other tooling.

Thanks for pointing me to this background!

I will change the groupIds back to o.a.c.

LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: Jörg Schaible <Joerg.Schaible@scalaris.com>
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 10:31 AM
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1424618 - in /commons/sandbox/privilizer/trunk: ./ ant/ ant/lib/
ant/test/ example/ maven-plugin/ modules/ modules/privilizer/ modules/privilizer/api/ modules/privilizer/api/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/weaver/privilizer/
modules/privi...
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Mark Struberg wrote:
> 
>>  Jörg, what about all older living projects which used to have own groups
>>  even, like commons-lang:commons-lang?
> 
> groupIds with pattern commons-XXX are legacy and we keep them only because 
> the relocation stuff of Maven does not really work well and we don't want to 
> 
> harass our users as long as any newer release is binary compatible. However, 
> for new components or as soon as a new binary incompatible version of an old 
> one is to be released, we change the groupId always to org.commons.apache 
> and this had been the case for *all* components until now.
> 
>>  Could you point me to this boilerplate stuff you think off? Maybe we can
>>  improve this.
> 
> IIRC we derive the value for the groupId from our parent pom at various 
> places and we had also manual tasks for infra for all our components with a 
> groupId of commons-xxx and I am not sure if this applies to all groupIds 
> that are unequal to org.apache.commons.
> 
>>  I have no problem with moving the packages back, but I personally think
>>  this would á la long end up in confusing end users.
> 
> As said, we have with vfs2 and jci already other commons components that 
> make a precedence for multiple artifacts of one component. We share 
> org.apache.commons as common groupId and therefore I am against a silent 
> change of naming policy here. Note, that I did not veto the commit, because 
> I want to hear other opinions, but without a consensus among us committers, 
> I'd veto any such release.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jörg
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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