Hi, 2008/6/29, Benjamin Bentmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Vincent Siveton wrote: > > > > FYI I created MNG-3634 and you could see the result here: > > > http://people.apache.org/~vsiveton/MNG-3634/maven-2.0.x/site/maven.html > > > > Comments are welcome! > > > > I prefer your initial suggestion, which might be looking like that after > incorporating the other elements: > > > <modelVersion/> > > <parent/> > > <groupId/> > <artifactId/> > <version/> > <packaging/> > > <name/> > <description/> > <url/> > <inceptionYear/> > <organization/> > <licenses/> > > <prerequisites/> > > <modules/> > > <developers/> > <contributors/> >
IMHO devs should be after licenses, since they describe more a project than a build. > <scm/> > <issueManagement/> > <ciManagement/> > <distributionManagement/> > <mailingLists/> same reasoning for ML. > <dependencies/> > <dependencyManagement/> I propose to put dependencyManagement before dependencies to improve the readingness. > <repositories/> > <pluginRepositories/> > > <build/> > > <reporting/> > > <profiles/> > > <properties/> > > When I was about to create a local maven.mdo reflecting this ordering, I > noticed that the boundaries imposed by the class hierarchy (Model/ModelBase) > make this impossible. Yes I already saw that. > So I wonder whether it was sensible to choose the Modello generated > ordering as the reference ordering. Maybe we should define the preferred > ordering independently (i.e. as part of the document created by MNGSITE-55) > and just link to it from the Model Reference? +1 Better option with more flexibility Cheers, Vincent > > Benjamin > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
