Felipe Leme wrote:
Hi all,
As we haven't reached a common sense on how to name the groups, I think we should vote for it. The issues are:
1.Multiple directories x one directory:
[ ] +1 Put everything in one directory (such as jakarta-taglibs)
Advantage: less groups on ibiblio
Disadvantage: the group is going to be huge (around 30-80 files on
each artifact sub-dir)
[ ] +1 Create one directory for group (ex: taglibs-standard,
taglibs-request). Advantages: easier to locate artifacts; consistent with the way
Jakarta Commons is organized
+1 The decision on which structure to use should be more dependent on the "type" of group structure you have. If you expect the various "subgroups" of your group to be releasing on separate schedules and/or have new sub-groups created, then I would recommend you place the artifacts into their own project directories. This way the various groups can maintain separate directory structures with separate contents, which will be easier to manage.
[ ] +0 Doesn't matter for me
2.(In case one directory wins previous poll) [ ] +1 Use new directory 'jakarta-taglibs Advantage: better identify which taglibs that group refers too Disadvantage: replication of existing directory ('taglibs')
+1 just because an old directory exists, doesn't mean that you as the individual managing taglibs maven release can't choose a new one, your the "canonical" source for these files. 'taglibs' is very generic.
[ ] +1 Use existing directory 'taglibs' Advantage: no replication of existing directory Disadvantage: name is too generic
-1 I agree, we see this problem arise in other areas of the repository, if it can be cleaned out, (or deprecated as the other thread suggests, that would be good)
[ ] +0 Doesn't matter for me
3.Where to put jstl.jar
[ ] +1 Wherever standard.jar is
Advantage: jstl.jar is created by Jakarta Standard Taglibs
Disadvantage: it's a JCP API of its own; replication of existing
directory ('jstl')
[ ] +1 On existing group jstl
Advantage: no replication of existing directory; better separation
between specification (JSTL) and implementation (Jakarta Standard
Taglibs)
Disadvantage: jar is created by another project (there is no JSTL
project on Jakarta/ASF); inconsistent with another groups (like
servletapi)
+1 this sounds good, JSTL is fairly unique in the community, I don't beleive there will be any naming clashes.
[ ] +1 On new group jstlapi Advantage: consistent with another groups (like servletapi); better separation between specification (JSTL) and implementation (Jakarta Standard Taglibs) Disadvantage: jar is created by another project (there is no JSTL project on Jakarta/ASF), replication of existing directory ('jstl'); ugly name [ ] +0 Doesn't matter for me
Notice that this is note a typical committer-issue-vote (it's not even
totally related to the Maven project itself), but I rather listen your
opinions now then decide the structure myself and have to handle the
consequences later (specially because we cannot change it once it's
uploaded to ibiblio).
Regards,
Felipe
-- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
