polygene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sandro Martini <sandro.mart...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] [Commented] (ZEST-20) Setup repository for maven artifacts
Date Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:15:00 GMT
to me all proposals seems good, unless objections from ASF for
artifacts names (or some technical constraints by Maven repository)
... maybe we could tell this in our next report to be sure (and have
less problems later), and write our plans for this for 3.0.


2015-06-15 11:40 GMT+02:00 Paul Merlin <paul@nosphere.org>:
> Niclas Hedhman a écrit :
>> I have no strong opinion about it. I just note that it is "should" and not
>> "must", and compatibility is always a reasonable excuse.
>> Are you suggesting that only the GroupId will be changed, and that the
>> artfacts are still called org.qi4j.core.api-2.1.jar  ?
> That's not what I was thinking about but we can also do this. Move
> groupId from org.qi4j.* to org.apache.zest.* ; keep the actual
> artifactIds and java packages.
> I understand "maven" groupIds as the organization that release the
> associated artifacts. Hence this discussion.
> I'm pretty sure we'll want to release 3.0 under org.apache.zest groupId.
> Maybe with org.apache.zest.* artifactIds. Maybe with java packages
> relocated under org.apache.zest. We didn't discuss this just yet and we
> have some time for this.
> On the other hand, if we can release 2.1 without groupId/artifactId
> relocation (org.qi4j.*:org.qi4j.*), the impact on existing applications
> upgrading from 2.0 to 2.1 will be close to none, and that'd be a good thing.
> In between the two is maven coordinates relocation without java packages
> changes. This should only impact the build system of existing
> applications upgrading from 2.0 to 2.1, not their codebase. I myself can
> live with that.
> We can ask for several groupIds for a single project at
> repository.apache.org. So, we could ask for both org.qi4j and
> org.apache.zest.
> What do you think?
> /Paul

View raw message