Thank you James! My question was more regarding why two of them are collapsed: - databinding - datastore vs non-collapsed: - data-mapping
Den fre 21 mars 2025 kl 17:30 skrev James Daugherty <jdaughe...@jdresources.net.invalid>: > Data binding & data mapping are definitely related. Binding is > transforming one source format to another. I.e. form url encoding being > parsed and populating properties on a class file. It only deals with > copying data from a source to a target. > > I would still view them separately since data mapping goes a step further: > it involves mapping to a database. It is more than just format parsing. > For example, how to map the BigDecimal on a groovy object to a valid > database type. Other examples include: database indexes, database > constraints, how tables are created (i.e. is there a join table that the > application doesn't see?), etc. > > datastore is a generic term for the mechanism used to implement the data > mapping. i.e. hibernate, mongodb, etc. > > On a side note, we often see "gorm" used in the data-mapping project, but > there are now nosql implementations like mongodb too. It's not really a > relational mapping anymore. That's why we've changed the name to > grails-data in the artifacts. This matches other project conventions such > as spring-data & micronaut-data. Long term, we may want to even 'gorm' > from being used and simply refer to it as 'grails-data' > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 12:07 PM Mattias Reichel < > mattias.reic...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Excuse a non-native english speaker, should these be treated the same or > > differently? > > databinding > > datamapping > > datastore > > > > Den fre 21 mars 2025 kl 16:38 skrev James Daugherty > > <jdaughe...@jdresources.net.invalid>: > > > > > I've updated the pull request for the following: > > > > > > artifactId: grails-gradle-console -> grails-console > > > artifactId: grails-gradle-model changed package from model -> gradle > > > artifactId: grails-security-spring -> grails-spring-security > > > artifactId: grails-rest-responder -> grails-rest-transforms > > > groupId: event -> events > > > groupId: view -> views > > > > > > This assumes a plural form to match existing grails convention in > package > > > names & groupids. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 11:11 AM James Daugherty < > > > jdaughe...@jdresources.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thank you. I'd rather we hyphenate all words in the artifact id. > It's > > > > easier to read. Also, we got rid of the additional prefixes so we'd > > only > > > > ever have the format `grails-X`. If we had prefixes to group them > > > > together, I'd agree, but since we don't, why not make it easier to > > read? > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 11:02 AM Mattias Reichel < > > > > mattias.reic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > Did you mean to say artifact ids instead of groupIds? > > > >> > > > >> Yes, sorry for the confusion, I meant artifactIds. > > > >> > > > >> Den fre 21 mars 2025 kl 15:55 skrev James Daugherty > > > >> <jdaughe...@jdresources.net.invalid>: > > > >> > > > >> > 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 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
