-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Jorg Heymans wrote:
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:22:24 +0100
From: Jorg Heymans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: svn commit: r367714 - in /cocoon/trunk/cocoon-template: ./
pom.xml src/ src/main/ src/test/
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Should this distinction be on the groupId?
Isn't the groupId just saying that all stuff in it belongs to the same
project?
I had a discussion a while ago with Brett Porter about this when i was
converting excalibur. Outcome was that ideally a groupId points to the
root package of that module's sources, but ofcourse practically this is
not always viable. So it's not only an indication of which project a
module belongs to, it can also express something about the
submodule/project/logical grouping within the application.
The maven guys haven't nailed down the exact semantics of the groupId
yet and they are aware of this. So let's not worry about it too much for
now, we can always change it later.
Don't we need to decided that before a first release of 2.2?
Is it wise to release a block into different groupIds?
- --
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland - http://www.otego.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDxPEGLNdJvZjjVZARAv22AKC4RFb5lSoCfoqIAQ68QYkxaO+n3ACgqzcF
5CFhnUXnrIGFcq64CnAWAig=
=DFje
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
