Here is a proposition for the svn (see attached files)
Please fill free to comment (and modify to correct mistakes)

Regards,

Raphaël


2006/3/8, Trygve Laugstøl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 06:34 +1100, Brett Porter wrote:
> Raphaël Piéroni wrote:
> >> That sounds like maven-archetype-mojo, that creates a mojo.
> >>
> >> Why don't we just have a whole bunch of subprojects, and then categorise
> >> them on the front page?
> >>
> > Why do the maven repository was refactored into components, plugins,
> > archetypes ? ;)
>
> I'm not saying anything about the svn structure. I think calling
> something publically the "Mojo Archetype subproject" is undesirable.
>
> I'd be fine with splitting mojo into /plugins/, /archetypes/,
> /components/ and /sandbox/ too.

Actually, I like this layout a whole lot. It would be just like Maven's
Apache repository which seem to work just great. I don't have time for
it right now, but I'd be +1 for someone to go ahead and move stuff
around in the repository.

--
Trygve


Reply via email to