On Jul 9, 5:58 am, Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-googlegroups. 620...@mired.org> wrote: > The other non- project requirement (a page linking the project to the domain > name) is pretty much contrary to the quote from the Java specification.
By my reading, they are talking about something different - the "groupId" which identifies the project in a Maven build file. Sun was piggybacking on URLs to make a naming convention for Java packages, Maven is piggy-backing on the Java package naming convention with additional restrictions to make a scheme for unique project IDs with traceable ownership and licensing. Although groupId and Java package names tend to resemble each other, and the description on the Maven page is conflating the two, they are two different entities and made to solve different problems. >From their FAQ on the same page: - I have a patched version of the foo project developed at foo.com, what groupId should I use? * When you patch / modify a third party project, that patched version becomes your project and therefore should be distributed under a groupId you control as any project you would have developed, never under com.foo. See above considerations about groupId. I guess Maven wants to be the kind of authoritative software artifact repository Clojars apparently isn't, judging from the comments in this thread. jf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
