> > <project> is the project name. It is unique within an organisation. If > > your artifact is a sub-project of a larger project, or is unique in > > some way, include that information in the name. For example, if your > > artifact is part of the "bar" project, which is a sub-project of > > "foo", then your project would be named "foo-bar". E.g:
Nick is right, we ought do it on the repository list to get a wider audience. For my own thoughts, I can appreciate guidance like this. I believe that given how projects mature/migrate (e.g. from sub to peer to TLP) we'll be in flux with 'groups'. I don't really mind how groups are defined since I think they are the starting point (the input data) for most of what depot will do, they aren't "calculated". BTW: I'd like to see commons-logging removed from the wiki, it isn't a big project and is perhaps a bad example. regards, Adam
