On 10/09/2011 11:28 AM, Felix Knecht wrote:
Hi all
A)
I setup a small sample how this could look alike when splitting things
off and discard legacy things.
Have a TLP pom.xml (james-parent / james-project or ...) being a merge
of the 2 former TLP/parent poms [1][2]. New the pluginManagement s
2011/10/9 Felix Knecht :
> On 10/09/2011 11:28 AM, Felix Knecht wrote:
> Hi all
Hi Felix,
I see you did a lot of thinking on this matter. I don't know the full
extent of the changes you proposed, but I will state my mind.
>
> A)
> I setup a small sample how this could look alike when splitting t
Hi Felix,
Thx for launching the discussion and implementing in a sandbox :)
I feel your focus is the maven-skin. Right?
I am also concerned with the way we handle the version dependencies.
Example: For now, each of the project (imap, mailbox...) has freedom to
define the derby version. This s
Hi Eric
On 10/12/2011 11:36 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Hi Felix,
Thx for launching the discussion and implementing in a sandbox :)
I feel your focus is the maven-skin. Right?
Well it's not that I'm focussing on maven-skin (anyway the name might be
confusing ...) but I remember when started in
2011/10/12 Felix Knecht
> On 10/12/2011 11:36 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
>> Thx for launching the discussion and implementing in a sandbox :)
>>
>> I feel your focus is the maven-skin. Right?
>
> Well it's not that I'm focussing on maven-skin (anyway the name might be
> confusing ...) but I remember
On 10/12/2011 12:31 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
2011/10/12 Felix Knecht
On 10/12/2011 11:36 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
Thx for launching the discussion and implementing in a sandbox :)
I feel your focus is the maven-skin. Right?
Well it's not that I'm focussing on maven-skin (anyway the name mig
On 12/10/11 12:18, Felix Knecht wrote:
Well it's not that I'm focussing on maven-skin (anyway the name might be
confusing ...) but I remember when started in the James project. It was
really hard to figure out the hierarchy parent poms.
I remember that also :)
We can have A) or B). But if we
On 10/12/2011 03:07 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
On 12/10/11 12:18, Felix Knecht wrote:
Well it's not that I'm focussing on maven-skin (anyway the name might be
confusing ...) but I remember when started in the James project. It was
really hard to figure out the hierarchy parent poms.
I remember th
> One more ...
>
> Can or should we find a more consistent naming for the produced artifacts?
> Look the prefixes at http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/james/
> - apache-james
> - apache
> - james
> - maven
> - none
Very good point Felix, I agree that we should adopt a constant naming
conven
2011/10/12 Ioan Eugen Stan :
>> One more ...
>>
>> Can or should we find a more consistent naming for the produced artifacts?
>> Look the prefixes at http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/james/
>> - apache-james
>> - apache
>> - james
>> - maven
>> - none
>
> Very good point Felix, I agree that
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> 2011/10/12 Ioan Eugen Stan :
>>> One more ...
>>>
>>> Can or should we find a more consistent naming for the produced artifacts?
>>> Look the prefixes at http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/james/
>>> - apache-james
>>> - apache
>>> -
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
>> or wait some comment from Robert before taking any step.
>
> As I've recently learnt, trademarks are tricky and any interpretations
> ("apache is a trademark, james, mime4j, imap are not trademarks") are
> best avoided on public l
12 matches
Mail list logo
