Richard S. Hall wrote:
Stuart McCulloch wrote:
On 22/05/07, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In summary, the dilemma we had was that everyone wanted the artifactId
to be the short name and the JAR file to be the long name. But if we
made the artifactId the short name, then we also got the short name for
the JAR.
FYI, it is possible to alter the final name of the jarfile from the
default.
The maven super pom, which all top-level poms inherit from, defines:
<build>
<finalName>${artifactId}-${version}</finalName>
... etc ...
but afaik there's no reason why the top-level felix pom couldn't say:
<build>
<finalName>${groupId}.${artifactId}-${version}</finalName>
... etc ...
then any jars in target folders would have the long form of the name.
However, the jarfile installed in the maven repository will still have
the standard ${artifactId}-${version} name, because that's defined
by the repository layout.
I guess that could be okay, although I still think it could lead to
confusion for people who might manually download artifacts from a
maven repository. What does everyone else think?
-> richard
If I understand this correctly, bundle jar files in the Maven repository
would have short filenames and they would have long filenames everywhere
else.
This causes problems for implementing FELIX-219 (Update
maven-bundle-plugin to install bundles to a local OBR) since the OBR
would have to know whether it is part of a Maven repository to adjust
the filename accordingly.
This seems overly complicated to me. I think that we should just stick
with the long filenames.
Tim
