IMHO, this means that there is the vast majority of "normal" case then there is life, where exceptionnally everything is mixed: - publishing a temporary fork (for example to have some local patches) - really forking or moving
then I'm not sure checking rules on what is inside an artifact while publishing in Central is the right thing to do: we don't do it currently (checking that package names are consistent with groupId), then I feel we should not do it either for module info it's just a basic convention for normal cases, that will be applied more than 90% of time: and there will be less than 10% of time where discrepency will happen, due to some special cases in code life As usual Regards, Hervé Le dimanche 19 février 2017, 00:45:29 CET Christian Schulte a écrit : > Am 02/18/17 um 12:25 schrieb Robert Scholte: > > The idea from Hervé and Rémi is about having a publish rule in Central if > > you want to publish a modular jar there which will prevent module name > > collisions. > > Because the groupId is already owned by a specific organisation, you could > > use them as well as "namespace"/prefix of the modular name to ensure that > > within Central modular names are unique. > > > > However, this collides with the idea from Mark who says that it should be > > possible to move a modulename from one organisation to another. That > > should only effect the GA, not the module name. > > Like we did with the resolver. Changed the coordinates but did not > change package names and class names. So the module name should not > change as well. This means the coordinates are nothing to consider for > the module names but package names and class names (the content - not > the coordinates). > > Regards, --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
