Richard S. Hall wrote:
On Mar 5, 2007, at 6:52 PM, Tim Moloney wrote:
Here is the reasoning behind my decision.
Making it <artifactId>FOO</artifactId>:
- allows us to use ${pom.artifactId} in many place in the pom.xml
file, reducing the number of manual changes from the template pom.xml
file
- allows us to not specify <Bundle-SymbolicName> in the bnd
<instructions> section, the bnd default works
- The path in the maven repository is
~/.m2/repository/org/apache/felix/commons/FOO/version/FOO-version.jar
which is still unique and far less wordy than
~/.m2/repository/org/apache/felix/commons/FOO/version/org.apache.felix.commons.FOO-version.jar
Well, I don't have a significant argument against, other than:
It is different that how we do Felix subprojects; at the time people
felt that long JAR names was a good idea because it would lessen the
possibility of JAR file name collisions (not everyone will use maven).
In the end, I can go either way, but I do dislike inconsistency.
Should we re-consider how we name our subproject JARs too? I dislike
the fact that we cannot use the plugin defaults too. :-)
-> richard
Consistency is a strong argument. I can go either way. Let the debate
begin. :)
Is there a way to define a custom variable (e.g. shortName) in pom.xml?
If so, we could do something like the following.
:
:
<groupId>org.apache.felix.commons</groupId>
<shortName>FOO</shortName>
<artifactId>${pom.groupId}.${pom.shortName}</artifactId>
<name>${pom.shortName} bundle</name>
<description>
This bundle simply wraps ${pom.shortName}-${pom.version}.jar.
</description>
:
:
<Bundle-SymbolicName>${pom.artifactId}</Bundle-SymbolicName>
:
:
Tim
