You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by ji...@codehaus.org on 2003/12/31 03:38:56 UTC

[jira] Updated: (MAVEN-1063) BaseObject id/name properties not necessarily reflected in schema

The following issue has been updated:

    Updater: Brett Porter (mailto:brett@codehaus.org)
       Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 8:37 PM
    Changes:
             Fix Version changed to 1.1
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
For a full history of the issue, see:

  http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=MAVEN-1063&page=history

---------------------------------------------------------------------
View the issue:

  http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=MAVEN-1063


Here is an overview of the issue:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
        Key: MAVEN-1063
    Summary: BaseObject id/name properties not necessarily reflected in schema
       Type: Bug

     Status: Unassigned
   Priority: Minor

 Original Estimate: Unknown
 Time Spent: Unknown
  Remaining: Unknown

    Project: maven
 Components: 
             model
   Fix Fors:
             1.1
   Versions:
             1.0-rc1

   Assignee: 
   Reporter: Jeffrey Bonevich

    Created: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 8:16 PM
    Updated: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 8:37 PM
Environment: any

Description:
There seems to be a pattern of the base POM classes extending BaseObject, which has name and id properties, but not necessarily declaring same in XSD or docs.  Which is better to follow - code, XSD, docs (my gut sez go with the code)?  Here are the inconsistencies I find:

*Organization - has name, no id
*Repository - no name or id
*Branch - adding name and id means it == Version, but maybe it should?
*MailingList - has name, no id
*Contributor - has name, no id; adding id means == Developer
*License - has name, no id
*Dependency - has id, no name
*Build - neither
*Report - neither

Does not necessarily make sense that they all should be - nor should code necessarily be directly reflected - in XSD.  But for some (Organization, Branch, Contributor, License, Dependency?) it makes sense???



---------------------------------------------------------------------
JIRA INFORMATION:
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.

If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa

If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org