You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com> on 2009/06/22 15:58:15 UTC
genesis-flava -> genesis-default-flava
Why was this module change made? If I recall I setup genesis-flava
and genesis-default-flava (as a child of the previous) on purpose.
Why was this changed?
--jason
Re: genesis-flava -> genesis-default-flava
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
> I spent a lot of hours with genesis 1.x looking through all the poms
> for the setting that was causing behavior I was wondering about to
> want to eliminate every bit of unnecessary complexity I could.
>
> In the event we come up with a flava that doesn't want to inherit
> from default-flava we can put it as a direct child of the root
> genesis project.
Fair enough :-)
>>> I also changed the groupId to o.a.g.genesis from
>>> o.a.g.genesis.flava.
>>
>> why?
>
> Fewer groupIds == simpler && better IMO. I don't see what the
> additional groupId adds except complexity and chance for confusion.
> Am I missing something?
Its just a tool for organizing similar modules, like packages in
java. I tend to organize stuff, which is why I put all flava's into
their own groupId.
--jason
Re: genesis-flava -> genesis-default-flava
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jun 22, 2009, at 10:34 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:03 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>> Why was this module change made? If I recall I setup genesis-
>>> flava and genesis-default-flava (as a child of the previous) on
>>> purpose.
>>>
>>> Why was this changed?
>>
>> Because I couldn't see the purpose. What good did genesis-flava
>> do? It seemed to me that it only required maven to load one more
>> pom for every genesis-using project. If you don't like genesis-
>> java*-flava being children of genesis-default-flava then I think we
>> should still avoid genesis-flava and make all the genesis-*-flava
>> children of genesis.
>
> I think I did that because I was unsure that every flava would want
> to include all of the default java stuff. Your only problem is the
> download of an additional pom?
I spent a lot of hours with genesis 1.x looking through all the poms
for the setting that was causing behavior I was wondering about to
want to eliminate every bit of unnecessary complexity I could.
In the event we come up with a flava that doesn't want to inherit from
default-flava we can put it as a direct child of the root genesis
project.
>
>> I also changed the groupId to o.a.g.genesis from o.a.g.genesis.flava.
>
> why?
Fewer groupIds == simpler && better IMO. I don't see what the
additional groupId adds except complexity and chance for confusion.
Am I missing something?
thanks
david jencks
>
> --jason
>
Re: genesis-flava -> genesis-default-flava
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:03 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>> Why was this module change made? If I recall I setup genesis-flava
>> and genesis-default-flava (as a child of the previous) on purpose.
>>
>> Why was this changed?
>
> Because I couldn't see the purpose. What good did genesis-flava
> do? It seemed to me that it only required maven to load one more
> pom for every genesis-using project. If you don't like genesis-
> java*-flava being children of genesis-default-flava then I think we
> should still avoid genesis-flava and make all the genesis-*-flava
> children of genesis.
I think I did that because I was unsure that every flava would want to
include all of the default java stuff. Your only problem is the
download of an additional pom?
> I also changed the groupId to o.a.g.genesis from o.a.g.genesis.flava.
why?
--jason
Re: genesis-flava -> genesis-default-flava
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jun 22, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> Why was this module change made? If I recall I setup genesis-flava
> and genesis-default-flava (as a child of the previous) on purpose.
>
> Why was this changed?
Because I couldn't see the purpose. What good did genesis-flava do?
It seemed to me that it only required maven to load one more pom for
every genesis-using project. If you don't like genesis-java*-flava
being children of genesis-default-flava then I think we should still
avoid genesis-flava and make all the genesis-*-flava children of
genesis.
I also changed the groupId to o.a.g.genesis from o.a.g.genesis.flava.
thanks
david jencks
>
> --jason
>
>