On 21/11/12 3:10 AM, John Gabriele wrote:
Oh, thanks. My understanding was that current best practice was to
choose a good name, and then if you're the original author, your
project's group-id = artifact-id (and thus you get the
https://clojars.org/my-proj url).
The thought behind Clojars' conventions is that unrelated projects
calling themselves clj-xpath distinguished by some kind of namespace is
never desirable as it makes it very difficult for *humans* to refer to
them ("Oh! You mean *that* clj-xpath..."). Public-facing project names
really should be globally unique and hence don't need to be namespaced.
Namespacing is very useful for private projects, subcomponents,
throwaway forks etc. The reversed domain name scheme may not be great
but it's the de facto way to do it if you do need a private namespace.
Forks are ugly but sometimes necessary, hence give them ugly names. Save
short, memorable and friendly names for public, canonical projects to
encourage use.
Note this is just what we recommend for Clojars and it's deliberately
not enforced. If your project targets a different ecosystem you should
follow their conventions instead. If you're targeting the wider JVM
ecosystem, you should put your project in Maven Central not in Clojars.
--
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
