b) unless you expect the poms to change ;)
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:09 AM, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm in favor of (b) as well. If we are deploying the original > NUnit.Framework assembly off of the NUnit site, then org.nunit makes sense, > but if its a recompile, we should use our own key to sign and pick a > different groupId (say org.apache.maven.dotnet). > > Shane > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> For pure, as released, 3rd party .NET artifacts, currently, we have this: >> http://vmbuild.apache.org/archiva/repository/dotnet/ >> >> There were some scripts in 0.14 for installing things locally but they were >> never shipped to a remote repository. >> >> I would like to start getting those into central. >> >> I think there are these options: >> (a) put them into http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 as is, ie NUnit : >> NUnit.Framework >> (b) put them into http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 with group IDs that are >> more maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework >> (c) put them in a new repo such as http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet as is, ie >> NUnit : NUnit.Framework >> (d) put them in a new repo such as http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet with >> group IDs that are more maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework >> >> I'm leaning towards (b). Thoughts? Any other options I've missed? >> >> Cheers, >> Brett >> >> -- >> Brett Porter >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ >> >> >
