On 24 March 2011 09:42, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Jorg, > I agree with you, but I think we've enough flexibility that if the > component needs to override the groupId, simply redeclare it.
If the groupId is omitted, it's not clear whether the omission is deliberate or was accidentally deleted. > BTW If we're changing the parent reference, maybe we need to to review > the whole set of metadata, I won't expect that a component is released > with overlooked groupId, do you? That has already happened - the groupId was changed in at least one component as part of various updates, and the change was not noticed during voting. > Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://www.99soft.org/ > > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Jörg Schaible > <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: >> sebb wrote: >> >>> On 24 March 2011 00:09, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:05 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 23 March 2011 23:37, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:28 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 23 March 2011 23:14, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> I think maven best practice would suggest to avoid groupId >>>>>>>> duplication - for pool2 we agreed to switch to o.a.c groupId. >>>>>>>> which problems are you speaking about? I'm asking because I would >>>>>>>> have missed something I don't know yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just mean that the POM should specify the groupId even if it is the >>>>>>> same as the parent. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I still don't understand the reason why it should do it, can you point >>>>>> me to some doc? >>>>> >>>>> AFAIK, there is no such document. >>>>> >>>>> But it's important for people reading the POM to know immediately what >>>>> the groupId is, without having to go searching for the parent. >>>> >>>> There is no need to go searching for the parent. You can just look at >>>> the <parent> element's groupId in the POM you're reading. >>> >>> OK, but I still think it's risky to rely on inheritance for such an >>> important value. >>> >>> In theory, the parent might be changed, e.g. to the Apache POM, as >>> used in Common Site >>> >>> Also, having an explicit value documents that the groupId is being >>> intentionally set for this component. >> >> The info is redundant, but I second Sebb here, simply because in Commons not >> every component has necessarily the same groupId. Currently we switch from >> the old M1-style groupId to this one only on purpose and therefore I prefer >> also the explicit definition here. >> >> - Jörg >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
