I believe it's the latter.
This is very reminiscent of the scenario encountered in NMaven - it
seems it makes most sense to specify it in the Maven using the first
format, but that the repository layout should use the fully qualified
name for the file itself.
Maybe a different repo layout is in order?
- Brett
On 22/05/2008, at 12:47 PM, Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi Arnaud and others,
What is the "official" Eclipse repo layout? According [1] and [2], [1]
seems the official. What others thinks?
For instance, with [1]
<groupId>org.eclipse.equinox</groupId>
<artifactId>app</artifactId>
and with [2]
<groupId>org.eclipse.equinox</groupId>
<artifactId>org.eclipse.equinox.app</artifactId>
Cheers,
Vincent
[1] mvn eclipse:to-maven
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-eclipse-plugin/to-maven-
mojo.html
[2] mvn eclipse:make-artifacts
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-eclipse-plugin/make-artifacts-mojo.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
