Yes this is true... but if I have to have a custom build of log4j that is
the price I have to pay... the exact same could be said for different
versions of log4j...
It is no different that specifying my own version (e.g. 1.2.14-onedash-01)
The advantage witch specifying my own version is that I
I was thinking of new projects, but the log4j example works.
If you do not rename the packages, Maven might cleverly mix new classes
from your log4j in with classes from the original log4j in some hapless
artifact that depends on both. This could cause bugs of nightmarish
difficulty to track.
No.
e.g.
(I own one-dash.com)
I might roll a custom version of log4j...
I would deploy this as
groupId=com.one-dash
artifactId=log4j
version=1.2.14
Why should I have to change the package names?
2009/3/20 Merv Green paradeofh...@gmail.com
Is it reasonable to insist that a project's Java
Is it reasonable to insist that a project's Java package name matches
${project.groupId}.${project.artifactId}, with dashes converted to
underscores, etc?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For
