It is such a common pattern to have the artifactId begin with the last part of the groupId that the OSGi bundle plugin handles that case out of the box.
Top-posting because I'm on my phone. Sorry. On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:49 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > Try mailing repository@ > > > > > On May 4, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > 2015-05-04 18:46 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>: > > > >> On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>>> On 5/3/15 11:56 AM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > >>>> On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Sergio Fernández <wik...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> we're discussing our first incubating release, and we came to the > >> issue > >>>>> that we are not grant with permissions to deploy maven artifacts to > >> the > >>>>> org.apache.commons groupId [1]. > >>>> Why org.apache.commons, and not, say, org.apache.commons.rdf? The > >>>> former seems overly broad to me. > >>> > >>> Could be we should have gone that way years ago when we moved to > >>> org.apache.commons:commons-foo; but that ship has sailed, so I think > >>> its best to stay consistent with the rest of the components and > >>> proceed as proposed. > >> > >> Some rambling thoughts (tm): > >> > >> I like to 'fix' things too but I was on the fence about this one until > now. > >> Yes, there is a redundancy because the substring 'commons' is in the > >> AID/GID twice; but that is OK I claim. Why? The GID is the TLP ID, so of > >> course we have o.a.commons, that's a must. The AID is the component, > which > >> I always call Commons Foo, and sometimes Apache Commons Foo when I want > to > >> make it clear to folks (at work for example) that I am talking about > >> software hosted at Apache. If I were to talk within Apache about Foo, I > bet > >> some folks would not know what Foo is or where it lives. If I say > 'Commons > >> Foo' then it's obvious (I hope). That is how I justify to myself the > >> commons in the AID. > >> > >> FWIW: Over at Log4j, we have "log4j-" as the prefix for all module > names, > >> and no one seems to mind. > > > > I'm all for consistency. VFS does it this way, Weaver does it this way, > > Chain does it this way. And GID matching TLP ID makes sense as well. > > > > Who can grant the necessary permissions? > > > > > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Phil > >>>> > >>>> Jochen > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> 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 > >> > >> > >> -- > >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > > > > > > -- > > http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > > http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > > http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter > > http://github.com/britter > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
