On Jun 5, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> I find it a PITA when the groupId doesn't match the Java package
> name for jar files. For modules (FKA configs), I don't have any
> opinion. For assemblies, I think we should use o.a.g.
Can you be more specific? What do you want the transaction jar
groupId to be? o.a.g or o.a.g.transaction?
I'm waffling but I guess I agree that shorter is better for the
assemblies, I would prefer o.a.g rather than o.a.g.assemblies
thanks
david jencks
>
> -dain
>
> On Jun 5, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>>> o.a.g.modules (formerly called configs)
>>> o.a.g.xxx (formerly called modules)
>>> o.a.g.plugins
>>> o.a.g.assemblies
>>> o.a.g.applications
>>> o.a.g.specs (has been in use for a while now)
>>
>> I think this is reasonable for the code-base as it exists now.
>>
>> --jason
>
|