[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Arik,
Yes, I have been using the prefix for alittle while but found that it is a
silly way to get around the problem given that maven coordinate system is
groupId:artifactId:version (http://maven.apache.org/pom.html)
artifactId does not need to be unique and it is contextual to groupId. It
is silly to keep appending what is essentailly a groupId to the
artifactId.
Well, I'd have to answer yes and no to that. The artifactId must be
unique within the context of the groupId. So if we take the example that
you gave (see below) we would, using the syntax "groupId:artifactId",
have either
1.
project:common-webapp
project:customer-webapp
or
2.
project-common:webapp
project-customer:webapp
If common and customer are tightly related they should have the same
groupId, meaning 1. above. And with that you have two unique
artifactIds: "common-webapp" and "customer-webapp". Problem solved.
Also what if there are more nested modules, prefixing artifactId would
means that the prefix grows as you go deeper. I definitely find that it is
harder to maitain the convention and harder still to enforce that
convention in a larger team environment.
BTW: I really think that the default finalName for the artifact should
have been a combination of groupId and artifactId. I think that is the
main motivation for users to prefix thir artifactId with project name.
Regards,
rOnn c.
"Arik Kfir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
05/15/2007 05:49 PM
Please respond to
"Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
To
"Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: Specifying IntelliJ module name with maven-idea-plugin
I always prefix my artifactId(s) with a common prefix - for that reason;
e.g.
"myproject-core", "myproject-commons", "myproject-webapp",
"myproject-webapp-jsf", "myproject-webapp-struts", and so on. It lengthens
the names, but makes everything clear (and I don't need to use the
'finalName' property too...)
On 5/15/07, Trygve Laugstøl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
I've notice that when using maven-idea-plugin, the module name that is
generated is based solely on artifact id.
Is there a particular reason for this? Why wouldn't it use project
name
instead?
The reason I'm asking this is that we have three maven projects with
following structure,
project/
+- common/webapp/
+- customer/webapp/
Where artifact names are simply the name of the directory (e.g.,
webapp),
and I use final-name as ${groupId}.${artifactId}-${version} to control
the
uniqueness of the actual artifacts file name that get generated.
Unfortunatly, with current maven-idea-plugin this results in a module
naming conflicting within IntelliJ. I think at the very least there
should
be a way to specify generated IntelliJ module's name, using pom's
project
name seems like a good idea to me.
Does anyone have any thought on this?
The artifact id is normally unique enough, but your idea is still useful
so please file an issue in JIRA[1].
[1]: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MIDEA
--
Trygve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
######################################################################
DISCLAIMER:
This email and any attachment may contain confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient you are not authorized to copy
or disclose all or any part of it without the prior written consent
of Toyota.
Opinions expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the
sender and not necessarily the opinions of Toyota.
Please scan this email and any attachment(s) for viruses.
Toyota does not accept any responsibility for problems caused by
viruses, whether it is Toyota's fault or not.
######################################################################
--
Dennis Lundberg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
