That's a good point. We need to consider some type of namespace convention for the packaging. dotnet:library, dotnet:exe, dotnet:winexe may work.
On 5/18/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In Java land, jar is a jar, and the "other jars" (ejb, maven-plugin, etc) get the more specific name. Does that make sense in this environment, or is it still too ambiguous? Also, 'library' seems at risk of clashing with another packaging type at some point. (Actually dll could too if we started producing win32 C apps :) Should they all be specific about being dotnet? - Brett On 17/05/2007, at 9:44 AM, Shane Isbell wrote: > Hi Roland, Evan > > Multiple packaging types have the same dll extension: netplugin, > library, > visual-studio-addin Each of these packaging types needs to be > specified > within the pom file because the life-cycle is slightly different > for the > given packaging type. In the case of the gac types, there are four > flavors > of gac types, all with the dll extension, each resolved > differently. That > some people (myself included) use the extension as the packaging > type in one > context and not in another causes some confusion. > > For consistency, the maven install plugin (dotnet version) would > need to use > -Dextension=dll when installing, but the muliple package types > within the > pom is required. > > Regards, > Shane > > > On 5/17/07, Roland Kofler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> because when you upload a package to you repo you declare >> -Dpackage-type=dll >> and in your pom <package>library</package> thats confusing >> in the java world you always use the short version, might be >> better stick >> to >> it >> >> thank you for the tool >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Package-library-should-be-dll- >> tf3770719.html#a10660870 >> Sent from the nmaven-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com<http:// >> nabble.com/> >> . >> >>
