On Sep 28, 2006, at 11:48 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 9/28/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd be happy with anything other than 'openejb' for a root pom
artifactId. Simply because if we use it, we no longer have the
option to create some sort of user-land deliverable with that name.
Maybe an openejb-N.N.jar and openejb-N.N.pom or something along those
lines.
What do you think?
I don't really know. It seemed very compeling to named it openejb.
XBean, OpenJPA did this too. Even Geronimo has its parent as geronimo.
Don't know why those projects didn't choose to follow Maven
convention like we did. Anything the Maven guys touch has a foo-
parent pom (Maven, Continuum, Mojo, Plexus, etc.).
I'm not a strong proponent of using openejb, but it looked the best
available choice.
Cool. Let's change it back then and keep 'openejb' on reserve for
something user-consumable.
-David
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl
