Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-maven-m2-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46901 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2005 20:43:01 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Feb 2005 20:43:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 501 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2005 20:42:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-maven-m2-dev-archive@maven.apache.org Received: (qmail 461 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2005 20:42:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact m2-dev-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: "Maven 2 Developers List" Reply-To: "Maven 2 Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list m2-dev@maven.apache.org Received: (qmail 432 invoked by uid 99); 21 Feb 2005 20:42:56 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.8 required=10.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_SBL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of mmaczka@interia.pl designates 217.74.65.44 as permitted sender) Received: from smtp1.poczta.interia.pl (HELO smtp.poczta.interia.pl) (217.74.65.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:42:54 -0800 Received: by smtp.poczta.interia.pl (INTERIA.PL, from userid 502) id C7680D23F0; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:42:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from poczta.interia.pl (mi01.poczta.interia.pl [10.217.12.1]) by smtp.poczta.interia.pl (INTERIA.PL) with ESMTP id 32247D23C2 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:42:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by poczta.interia.pl (INTERIA.PL, from userid 502) id 36FB418F51C; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:42:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (adsl-62-167-157-12.adslplus.ch [62.167.157.12]) by poczta.interia.pl (INTERIA.PL) with ESMTP id 477B518F5A0 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:36:18 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <421AC515.6000104@interia.pl> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:37:25 -0800 From: Michal Maczka User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maven 2 Developers List Subject: Re: Dependency naming convention References: <5057337D9D7FD91196AD0008C7596EC50AB0E9@imtfexchange.imtf.ch> <421A3D59.3060009@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <421A3D59.3060009@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Brett Porter wrote: >I think it would be much wiser to use a package name for group Id going >forward for consistency. > >org.apache.maven > >http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8003 > > > Is there any reason for that? I knew that this wiki page exists but this proposition does not make much sense for me. I think that "/" is natural symbol which is very commonly used to divide segments in the paths. In addition "/" should already work in both in m1 & m2 (if not probably some minor correction will be needed) while usage of "." will require extra logic in __any tool___ which will use poms including m1 and m2 (thus will make implementation harder) Also if we will use "." it will turn this symbol into forbiden characters which not should be used in names of the segments (unless we will define special way of escaping it). So direectory name should not containt dots. Note that people can still use "/" and it will be hard to decide what you want to do in case when this chracter was used. So usage of "." will make whole thing more complicated to implement, use, document and understand and I don't see a __single__ profit from this convention. Can you point to least one reason why "your" convention is better? I think it will be nice to stick to well establised standarts e.g: http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc3986.html#path http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc3986.html#reserved I hope (I will experiment tommorow) that actually "/" is already fully supported by m1 and no changes are needed. So my question is: would it be wise to start using it already? Michal