db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Fischer <fisc...@seitenbau.net>
Subject Re: torque 3.3 schedule
Date Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:24:44 GMT
a) we cannot use a m2 build only because the m1 plurgin needs an m1 build.
And we cannot use a m1 build only because the m2 plugin needs a m2 build.
So we have to use two types of repository at the moment and we cannot do
anything against it.
b) The m1:org.apache.torque is the long term goal. I'd not switch the group
id in an rc. Also, having the two goup ids separates the two builds: group
id "torque" are the m1 built files, group id "org.apache.torque" are the m2
built files.  So I'd prefer to keept he the  m1:torque,
m2:org.apache.torque solution for 3.3. This does not mean I'm -1 on the
other solution, it is just my personal preference.

    Thomas

Thomas Vandahl <tv@apache.org> schrieb am 16.10.2007 22:24:52:

> Thomas Fischer wrote:
> >> - I'd propose to put the resulting jar into the Maven repository in
the
> >>    "torque" group or "org.apache.torque" respectively. What do others
> >>    say?
> >
> > m1:torque, m2:org.apache.torque is good.
>
> The repository people are bugging everybody to settle on one type of
> repository only. Shouldn't we try to use one group only for Torque? I
> propose to deploy the artifacts to the m2-repo only and use
> 'org.apache.torque' for this. Would that create big obstacles for the
> two maven plugins?
>
> Bye, Thomas.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org
>


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


Mime
View raw message