On Jan 4, 2017 4:46 AM, "Jochen Theodorou" <blackd...@gmx.org> wrote:
On 04.01.2017 07:28, Mark Struberg wrote: [...] I'm a bit surprised that groovy still uses the org.codehaus groupId, but I > guess they have a deal with Ben (the former owner and thus (former?) > copyright holder of 'Codehaus'). > So while this will work for now I guess that even groovy will move to > org.apache.groovy in the long term (maybe with a new major version). > A new major version is a big thing for Groovy, but yes. In our view it is the only realistic way, since people can expect breaking changes between major versions and that includes in our view package names as well as group ids. It's not a big deal YET, but http://codehaus.org is not reachable anymore. > And if anyone buys this domain he will have a much better position > regarding trademarks than we do. > What if someone buys the codehaus.org domain and publishes own artifacts > under org.codehaus.groovy? Can we even prevent someone else to e.g publish > org.codehaus.groovyng artifacts? > Assume we change and 2 months later somebody does that? How is the situation then any better? Actually I wonder if Ben would donate the domain to the ASF... This would be a huge deal for NetBeans too. Too many projects based off of it. The domain is being donated to Apache though AFAIK, but still, end users shouldn't have to change so many sources or break other dependencies, which may not be using the new package names, just because the package names are org.netbeans and someone thinks they should be org.apache.netbeans unless there is a true legal reason, and that would be rare, but a different email thread I imagine, but way more complicated than just changing the package name in the case of Groovy or NetBeans because we are talking about whole ecosystems and dependency graphs. Thanks Wade
