On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:54 AM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have studied EMAIL-186. My impression is, that all commons jar files > > should provide a fixed module name, rather than trusting in the choice > > of the JDK. Thus, it seems best to handle this in parent. So, here's > > my proposal for a change. Please, let me know, what you think of that, > > so that I can either fix it, op proceed with committing. > > What exactly does 'fixed' mean in this context?
That I am open for adopting suggestions, etc. > If it is supposed to be tied to API compatibility, then strictly > speaking it needs the group-id as well. > > If there is only supposed to be one module name regardless of API > compatibility, then artifact-id won't do as it is not immutable. That's why a component can set the property commons.module.name in their own POM. Jochen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
