Sorry for the delay of the reply. You have my +100. When a project want to host it, il always better to have the plugin near to the project to have a better support. Jason, don't forget that you'll have to create/maintain at least a parent pom to reproduce settings that we have in the mojo project. This parent pom could extended by your sub-project and also by groovy core libs. Another side effect is that you could/must have to use the groupId org.codehaus.groovy which isn't a groupId recognized by maven as a plugin groupId (by default).
Arnaud On Nov 29, 2007 8:17 AM, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, based on the feedback so far, I think this is a go. I'm going > to release 1.0-beta-3 from Mojo and then work on moving it over, so > the next after 1.0-beta-3 release will be from the Groovy project. > > --jason > > > On Nov 28, 2007, at 5:35 AM, Jeff Genender wrote: > > > +1 from me ;-) > > > > Jeff > > > > Jason Dillon wrote: > >> Hi folks, as some of you may already know, I've been continuously > >> working on creating solid (dare I say kick-ass) integration for > >> Groovy > >> into Maven 2. Its come a long way since I started hacking on Jeff > >> Genender's original bits oh so many months ago :-) > >> > >> I was thinking that now might be a good time to migrate the related > >> modules (the bits under https://svn.codehaus.org/mojo/trunk/mojo/groovy > ) > >> to the Groovy project (http://groovy.codehaus.org). > >> > >> My primary reasoning for this move would be to get the core Groovy > >> developers closer to the Maven integration sources, hopefully to > >> enlist > >> some more Groovy minds to add features, fix bugs, etc. A wee side > >> effect to that is that we may get more Groovy folks more learned in > >> the > >> ways of Maven and help enlighten their development ways (or not who > >> knows). But the main reason is to get those with Groovy on their > >> mind > >> closer to this code-base to help it grow, mature and flow into the > >> what > >> I'd hope may eventually become the preferred way to add dynamic > >> scripting into Maven 2 (but again, who knows). > >> > >> ATM... I am really the only Mojo developer who is actively working on > >> the Groovy integration, so moving the code-base to the Groovy project > >> has little to no impact on developer access to sources. > >> > >> The changes will involve moving the SVN tree from here: > >> > >> * https://svn.codehaus.org/mojo/trunk/mojo/groovy > >> > >> to here: > >> > >> * https://svn.codehaus.org/groovy/groovy-maven2/trunk (actually URL > >> might differ slightly) > >> > >> Replacing all of the site ( http://mojo.codehaus.org/groovy ) with a > >> redirect to the similar published location under: > >> > >> * http://groovy.codehaus.org > >> > >> And I guess updating the permissions of the MGROOVY JIRA project ( > >> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MGROOVY ). > >> > >> * * * > >> > >> Anyways, right now its just a thought. I already spoke with Jeff > >> Genender and Guillaume Laforge about the idea and both seem to be > >> leaning in the positive direction. So, I wanted to ask both > >> communities > >> what they think about moving the Groovy Maven integration modules > >> from > >> the Mojo project to the Groovy project? > >> > >> --jason > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > -- .......................................................... Arnaud HERITIER .......................................................... OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com www.octo.com | blog.octo.com .......................................................... ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org www.apache.org | maven.apache.org ...........................................................
