geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: I think groupIds in m2 build need improvement
Date Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:08:57 GMT
I guess the other consideration is for people outside our project that want to pick up piece
parts 
(like the Tx manager).  Please remember that not all OSes will be able to tolerate super long
file 
names and these will go into the repo.  I know there is some head room but were stealing it
from the 
users.

David Jencks wrote:
> Right now the groupIds in the m2 build are
> 
> org.apache.geronimo.modules for the jar files
> org.apache.geronimo.configs for the car files
> 
> I think these are both bad.  First of all, due to our recent renaming, 
> the configs should if anything get the modules name :-).
> 
> More important, I think at least for jars the groupId should be part or 
> all of the package name of the stuff in the jar.  So, we'd either use
> org.apache.geronimo
> 
> or
> 
> org.apache.geronimo.activation
> org.apache.geronimo.axis
> org.apache.geronimo.axis-builder
> ...
> org.apache.geronimo.webservices
> 
> for the jars.  Personally I have a preference for plain 
> org.apache.geronimo for all the jars.  However if recommended maven 
> usage is the longer names I'm ok with that too.
> 
> For the configurationsXXXXXXXXX modules, I'm nearly neutral between 
> org.apache.geronimo and org.apache.geronimo.module[s], slightly 
> preferring the shorter name.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message