Return-Path: 
 <felix-dev-return-5143-apmail-incubator-felix-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-felix-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 43261 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2007 07:17:58 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Mar 2007 07:17:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 48687 invoked by uid 500); 13 Mar 2007 07:18:06 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-felix-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 48655 invoked by uid 500); 13 Mar 2007 07:18:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact felix-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:felix-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:felix-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:felix-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <felix-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: felix-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list felix-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 48644 invoked by uid 99); 13 Mar 2007 07:18:06 -0000
Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:18:06 -0700
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of adreghiciu@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.172 as permitted sender)
Received: from [66.249.92.172] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.172)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:17:55 -0700
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id y2so193051uge
        for <felix-dev@incubator.apache.org>;
 Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=h2CaQ9x3f5uTvX+Xg/8vlt3W3IDduFAr31qffROSVlLlKlvJ7hrR8PrX7vFct9KNN0ycUeUjB4unWo2u4TK3KFN27VsfXmWGI92hdshPkYnExh4qMJIVVjIa93Bkwiv3+mAiCwXr7Vum0jM/BTJDDZLY2Y42zxTRDDSasvDuUqc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=Vait3LSN4gKFqrvMQVjJuPLBr9rTInkj6Ehim2hnfsKaaEt+ac16hbRqMUR5FbBgQCyUuvzcpIkLsBJ98jjx3eldMtLJYznf+FryesfLWpfJeB2XoUwRL+TUWVutIVlH150okUPzlyXaMX88WK6fgxnuACH1Z5x0t+gLgvZ3uGQ=
Received: by 10.114.37.1 with SMTP id k1mr2243702wak.1173770252585;
        Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.115.74.17 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <87eb8aee0703130017ta449694o1f04264ce639eb4d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:17:32 +0200
From: "Alin Dreghiciu" <adreghiciu@gmail.com>
To: felix-dev@incubator.apache.org, erodriguez@apache.org
Subject: Re: What about Felix Commons
In-Reply-To: <568753d90703122102h6055f8dag96be0fd8138e6bac@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_18598_31453020.1173770252511"
References: <87eb8aee0703080407x2f57cfr76ede4088d04a70a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <87eb8aee0703111310q70aa8ffbof604b417b320332@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45F4635D.8020009@ungoverned.org>
	 <87eb8aee0703111329h6cf552capc755cffd89dfda85@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45F46835.9080107@ungoverned.org>
	 <87eb8aee0703111357q189b02bv88bee10d694c1727@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45F49550.10208@ungoverned.org>
	 <87eb8aee0703120002n79901f86refd63642d62c3511@mail.gmail.com>
	 <87eb8aee0703120410u2ee411e3o1b0fc7754cf18c8e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <568753d90703122102h6055f8dag96be0fd8138e6bac@mail.gmail.com>
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

------=_Part_18598_31453020.1173770252511
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I would think again about the shortName. First is not very suggestive (name
of what?) and second it will make people invent new names for the same
stuff. I would go for something as
<pkgArtifactId>commons-attributes-api</pkgArtifactId> and the value to
always match the
original package.

Alin

On 3/13/07, Enrique Rodriguez <enriquer9@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/12/07, Alin Dreghiciu <adreghiciu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Take a look at an example:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-240
> > I had to add a new property: osgiVersion because pakage version does not
> > always conforms to osgi format. As in the example above the package
> > was 2.2but becasue of the pom version and snapshot the version will be
> > 2.2.0001-SNAPSHOT which is invalid. so the osgi version reuses the
> package
> > version and adds .0
>
> So, I think I'm caught up on these threads OK.  I merged the above
> latest round of thinking on the versioning scheme with the earlier
> thread regarding the shortName.  The gist of it is that with:
>
> <properties>
>   <shortName>commons-attributes-api</shortName>
>
>   <pkgVersion>2.2</pkgVersion>
>
>   <pomVersion>0001</pomVersion>
>
>   <osgiVersion>${pkgVersion}.0</osgiVersion>
>
> </properties>
> ...
>   <groupId>org.apache.felix.commons</groupId>
>
>   <artifactId>${pom.groupId}.${shortName}</artifactId>
>
>   <version>${osgiVersion}-${pomVersion}-SNAPSHOT</version>
>
> ... you get an artifact named:
>
> org.apache.felix.commons.commons-attributes-api-2.2.0-0001-SNAPSHOT.jar
>
> On the bright side, with the "SNAPSHOT" and the fact that
> "commons-attributes-api" is about as long as they come to begin with,
> I think this is a worst case scenario in terms of length.
>
> The manifest looked good, including the package versioning.
>
> Is that what we want?  Did I get that right?
>
> Enrique
>

------=_Part_18598_31453020.1173770252511--