On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Manuranga Perera <m...@wso2.com> wrote:
> Our current naming convention [1] looks like:
> <groupId>org.wso2.carbon</groupId>
> <artifactId>org.wso2.carbon.core</artifactId>
>
> But I believe it should be like (and maven recommended [2]):
> <groupId>org.wso2.carbon</groupId>
> <artifactId>kernel</artifactId>
>
> (I see the second patten in some C5 based code [3]. So not sure which one
> is the convention.)
>
The reason we use the first is that, we are following equinox bundle naming
convention (and most of the apache OSGi related projects uses the same
convention) and also to avoid any duplication of bundle names with OSGi
runtime.
> One issue with the second approach is, there is a risk of Bundle-Name not
> being unique since we currently use "${project.artifactId}" as the
> Bundle-Name. But we can easily use something like "
> ${project.artifactId}.${project.groupId}" instead.
>
Yes, this is an option but I don't see any big differences from this to the
approach we currently use.
> What do you think ?
>
> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-kernel/blob/master/core/pom.xml#L28
> [2] https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-naming-conventions.html
> [3]
> https://github.com/wso2/msf4j/blob/master/analytics/msf4j-analytics/pom.xml#L29
> --
> With regards,
> *Manu*ranga Perera.
>
> phone : 071 7 70 20 50
> mail : m...@wso2.com
>
--
*Kishanthan Thangarajah*
Associate Technical Lead,
Platform Technologies Team,
WSO2, Inc.
lean.enterprise.middleware
Mobile - +94773426635
Blog - *http://kishanthan.wordpress.com <http://kishanthan.wordpress.com>*
Twitter - *http://twitter.com/kishanthan <http://twitter.com/kishanthan>*
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
Architecture@wso2.org
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
