Yes. I use edu.ku.middleware for my team's projects in our local repository.
-- Kathryn Huxtable Middleware Architect Core Middleware Information Technology, a division of Information Services The University of Kansas On 2/3/06 10:59 AM, "Mike Perham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The old naming practices are used for compatability with existing POMs. > I think your suggestion is an excellent one if we were to import the > commons jars now. > > For instance, new versions of spring and hibernate are going in > "org.springframework" and "org.hibernate" respectively. > > If your module is going to be publically published I would suggest using > your domain name, just like you do with packages. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: KC Baltz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 10:50 AM > To: users@maven.apache.org > Subject: Best practice for choosing a groupId? > > Are there any guidelines for choosing a groupId for a project? It seems > like there are several techniques on ibiblio and I think some of it has > historical motivation. > > For example, the Jakarta Commons projects all seem to use a groupId that > matches artifactId. So you end up with commons-util/commons-util. I > would have thought the groupId would have been "org.apache.jakarta" with > artifactId "commons-util". > > The other question is: does the choice of groupId really matter? Does > it affect anything beyond helping people locate a dependency in the > repository? > > K.C. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
