1. Did you mean to say artifact ids instead of groupIds? 2. We should decide on noun vs plural forms. I'm personally a fan of the noun approach. What are other people's thoughts? 3. I named it model because all that library does is expose the classpath. I could see it being used for other purposes. I'm fine moving it to .gradle though.
I think everyone has mentioned this, but I guess we should change it back to "spring-security" instead of "security-spring" based on Gianluca's follow-up comments & James F's. On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 4:08 AM Mattias Reichel <mattias.reic...@gmail.com> wrote: > We are getting there! > > A couple of more thoughts and suggestions on the last iteration ( > > https://github.com/jdaugherty/grails-core/blob/3b4da92e339b7b688011e4a8ffc3c2aaea723680/RENAME.md?plain=1 > ): > > 1. As we are working with groupings, I think we should consider collapsing > some group parts in the groupIds as they really are the same group part and > not groups of their own: > spring-boot -> springboot > url-mappings -> urlmappings > data-mapping -> datamapping > testing-support -> testingsupport > domain-class -> domainclass > > 2. We are using the singular form of the groups (that are nouns) for every > groupId except codecs and profiles. Should we be consistent here: > org.apache.grails.codecs:grails-codecs-core -> > org.apache.grails.codec:grails-codecs-core > org.apache.grails.profiles:web -> org.apache.grails.profile:web > > Another way would be to do the plural form everywhere: > org.apache.grails.event -> org.apache.grails.events > org.apache.grails.view -> org.apache.grails.views > > 3. The org.apache.grails.model groupId feels a bit strange to me as it is > very generic. > org.apache.grails.model:grails-gradle-model -> > org.apache.grails.gradle:grails-gradle-model > > /Mattias > > Den fre 21 mars 2025 kl 07:51 skrev Gianluca Sartori <g.sart...@gmail.com > >: > > > Okay, my proposal was based on the meaning of “security” as a group > rather > > than referencing to a specific library (remaining open to other security > > libraries) but I can see your concerns. > > > > It may be better not to reverse the spring security name. > > > > It could be “grails-security-spring-security” but I’m not sure I like it > > that much. > > > > Gianluca > > > > > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 at 00:17, James Fredley <jamesfred...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > I reviewed the > > > > > > https://github.com/jdaugherty/grails-core/blob/3b4da92e339b7b688011e4a8ffc3c2aaea723680/RENAME.md?plain=1 > > > iteration and put my approval on the PR. > > > > > > I am still a little concerned with the artifacts being security-spring > > and > > > the project name being spring-security. Matching the upstream project > > seems > > > like the best idea https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security. > > > > > > On 2025/03/20 17:18:45 James Daugherty wrote: > > > > I tried to update the PR description to summarize some of the > > highlights > > > of > > > > this thread. If I missed anything, please speak up. > > > > > > > > I also realized the grails-console had a subpackage, so I removed > that > > > > subpackage for consistency. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/14080 > > > > > > > > -James > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:58 PM James Daugherty < > > > jdaughe...@jdresources.net> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > @Gianluca, were you ok with the latest draft? > > > > > https://github.com/apache/grails-core/pull/14080 > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:56 PM Gianluca Sartori < > > g.sart...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Okay sounds good > > > > >> > > > > >> Gianluca > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 17:52, James Daugherty > > > > >> <jdaughe...@jdresources.net.invalid> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > I don't think we should rename any repositories until builds are > > > fully > > > > >> > working. It will delay the 7 release process otherwise. The > goal > > > of > > > > >> this > > > > >> > discussion is specific to the groupid / artifactid. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:46 PM Gianluca Sartori < > > > g.sart...@gmail.com> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Yes, I am just talking about the repository name, not the > > groupId > > > or > > > > >> > > artifactId. > > > > >> > > The repository name can be any name available in our Git > > > namespace, it > > > > >> > will > > > > >> > > not conflict or influence any other repository name on any > other > > > > >> GitHub > > > > >> > > namespace. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Gianluca > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
