directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: Coding rules, some more things to discuss
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 08:57:47 GMT
On 8/31/11 10:33 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote:
> Hi Felix,
> On 31 août 2011, at 10:07, Felix Knecht wrote:
>> On 08/31/2011 09:08 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote:
>>> One more thing I'd like to add to pom.xml guidelines, I really like when dependencies
are ordered in alphabetical order.
>>> In Studio, we deal with a lot of dependencies for each project (mostly Eclipse
dependencies + a few others) and having them ordered REALLY helps when looking for something,
>> I absolutely agree. On which tag (groupId | artifactId) would you order them? No
matter wich one we take it should be the first tag after<dependency>, so for artifactId
it would be
>> <dependency>
>>   <artifactId>shared-ldap-model</artifactId>
>>   <groupId></groupId>
>> </dependency>
>> Ordering by groupId would make it possible to group then under a common "label".
> My personal preference would be to keep the structure of a dependency element the way
it is used at the moment (groupId tag first then and artifactId in second), like this:
> <dependency>
>   <groupId>${groupId}</groupId>
>   <artifactId>${artifactId}</artifactId>
> </dependency>
> I would order dependencies by groupId first and then, in the case of an identical groupId,
I would order them via their artifactId.
> That's why I think we should stick with the order groupId, artifactId.
> But I might be wrong. ;)

I'm with you here. Order should be by GroupId then ArtifactId.

Emmanuel Lécharny

View raw message