How about unpublished instead of private?
On 1/19/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 19, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > Seems fairly logical, but Subversion allows us to move things around > if it needs to be changed again. True, just trying not to do it too often to avoid upsetting local Eclipse workspaces. > I am a little confused by the "private" in the names, though. Maybe I > just don't understand what you were trying to do, but the term seems > to imply non-open source to me, which of course is not correct. Interesting, of course nothing like that was implied. "private" here means that the module at deployment time will be a part of another aggregated module. Such module should not be published as a standalone module in a public repository and should not be imported by Cayenne users directly. Just like a "private" variable in Java. Again, "private" == "do not publish in the repo". But then, I am not sure what Maven recommended practices are in this respect. This is totally my invention coming of a need to provide user-friendly modules (cayenne-client, cayenne-server) - the idea that breaks neat and clean Maven picture of the world :-) Andrus
