www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [repo] /www/people.apache.org/repo/m1-ibiblio-rsync-repository/
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:21:38 GMT
As far as I can tell, the association of a project with a PMC is for  
convenience and has nothing to do with the name or identity of the  
project. Look at projects that used to be in jakarta and are now in  
commons. And the DB PMC has a grab bag of projects.

I suppose you could say the same about the groupId, but I think the  
connection between a PMC and a groupId is much more tenuous than  
between a project identity and a groupId.

So I'd like to see the projects continue to choose their groupId  
according to consensus within the projects, possibly based on  
recommendations made by others (e.g. the maven folks are happy to  
recommend naming schemes, and the PMC's themselves might contribute  
ideas); and not have Apache or anyone else tell the projects how to  
name their groupIds.

Craig

On Dec 12, 2006, at 12:54 PM, Carlos Sanchez wrote:

> I'm not making any decision, that's why this thread started. I recall
> that there was at some point some agreement that it was going to be
> org.apache.PMCName, somebody can refresh my memory?
>
> I'm sorry I don't really know who to ask about this as it affects all
> projects in apache.
>
> On 12/12/06, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Carlos,
>>
>> If it is an apache wide decision, then people should be consulted,
>> *you* can't make that decision.
>>
>> -- dims
>>
>> On 12/12/06, Carlos Sanchez <carlos@apache.org> wrote:
>> > I think it is an apache wide decision how to make groupids look  
>> like,
>> > not just ws PMC.
>> >
>> > What I'm gonna do next time there's doubts about anything in the  
>> repo
>> > is move it out of the way until they are cleared.
>> >
>> > On 12/12/06, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Carlos, Wendy,
>> > >
>> > > Am sorry. It's none of repository@'s business on how the group Id
>> > > should look like!!! It's upto the project and it's pmc.
>> > >
>> > > Please leave things the way they are. If you wish to influence  
>> the
>> > > decisions, please drop by general@ws and evangalize there.
>> > >
>> > > thanks,
>> > > dims
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 12/12/06, Carlos Sanchez <carlos@apache.org> wrote:
>> > > > I think we are still in the timeframe for moving it, anybody  
>> disagree?
>> > > >
>> > > > On 12/12/06, Chamikara Jayalath <chamikaramj@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > I understand your point.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Unfortunately Sadesha2 release was also done on Sunday.  
>> And dists etc are
>> > > > > already available in Apache dists and other mirrors.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I would have certainly corrected the group id hd I know  
>> that such a
>> > > > > discussion occured here before but I guess its too late  
>> now :-(
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Chamikara
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On 12/12/06, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On 12/11/06, Chamikara Jayalath <chamikaramj@gmail.com>
 
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Actually I was following the convention that was being
 
>> followed by many
>> > > > > WS
>> > > > > > > projects. I.e. to have the package name in the group
Id.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > For example Apache Axis2 project has the group Id '
 
>> org.apache.axis2'
>> > > > > and
>> > > > > > > Apache Axis has the group Id 'org.apache.axis'. Is
 
>> there an reason to do
>> > > > > it
>> > > > > > > differently in this project ?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > The Maven convention is to use a domain name that you  
>> control, not
>> > > > > > (necessarily) the package name.  (See:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-ibiblio- 
>> upload.html)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > In addition, within Apache we like to be able to easily
 
>> identify the
>> > > > > > responsible PMC by looking at the groupId.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I think we've talked about Axis and Axis2 here before. 
 
>> IMO, they also
>> > > > > > belong under org.apache.ws and should eventually be  
>> relocated.  When
>> > > > > > there are existing releases, changing the groupId can  
>> cause some pain,
>> > > > > > so they're generally being allowed to stay for now.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > For new sub-projects within Apache, there's no reason to
 
>> continue
>> > > > > > inventing new groupIds that don't correspond to top  
>> level projects.
>> > > > > > For this one, org.apache.ws.sandesha2 seems appropriate.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Carlos, any further thoughts on this?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Wendy
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
>> > > > No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
>> > > >                              -- The Princess Bride
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Davanum Srinivas : http://www.wso2.net (Oxygen for Web Service  
>> Developers)
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
>> > No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
>> >                              -- The Princess Bride
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Davanum Srinivas : http://www.wso2.net (Oxygen for Web Service  
>> Developers)
>>
>
>
> -- 
> I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
>                             -- The Princess Bride

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message