geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: I think groupIds in m2 build need improvement
Date Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:32:42 GMT


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?

I think that we should keep everything org.apache.geronimo.  Having a 
byzantine group id hierarchy will only confuse those poor souls that 
want to use our artifacts.


Regards,
Alan



Mime
View raw message