Well looking through the Apache repo there is no 100% standard, but most
artifacts are indeed prefixed with the project name but not apache … I’ll add
the edgent to each of the artifacts.
Chris
Am 07.06.17, 13:47 schrieb "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>:
Usually the maven norm is something like
com.mycompany.myproduct:myproduct-some-module.
So I would expect to see groupIds of org.apache.edgent, and artifact id's
of edgent-some-module. However, I've noticed that both Eclipse and IBM
(obviously not related in any way) seem to use completely different
artifact formats. I would recommend being an Apache project you adopt the
Apache Maven standard format.
John
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 7:44 AM Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’ll answer this one quickly as I can do that without digging in too deep.
>
> I wouldn’t add the apache-edgent to the artifact names as the groupId
> already qualifies them as apache edgent modules.
> However when creating a release zip/tar.gz with the sources or binary
> distribution I would add the “apache-edgent-” prefix.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Am 06.06.17, 23:02 schrieb "Dale LaBossiere" <dml.apa...@gmail.com>:
>
> Currently the generated JAR/WAR lack an “edgent” or “apache-edgent”
> prefix, e.g., "api-topology-1.2.0-SNAPSHOT.jar". How important/required
is
> it to add that before we start publishing these to mvn repos?
>
> What’s the current ASF best-practice in this regard? e.g., I some
> (limited) # of “apache-XYZZY-…” in maven central. Presumably there are
> many many others that omit the “apache-" - e.g., “beam-sdks-…”
>
> — Dale
>
>
>
>
