You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com> on 2006/06/04 08:18:12 UTC
Re: JAR file naming (was Re: [Maven Plugin] Additional fixes...)
On 5/30/06, Jeff McAffer <Je...@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote on 05/30/2006 03:18:08 AM:
>
> > Interestingly enough, I just spent some time poking about the M2 repo on
>
> > ibiblio. If Felix were to adopt the FQDN approach for its libs, it
> > appears that we would be the only project in Apache doing so. On the
> > other hand, it does seem to be a semi-standard practice to prefix with
> > the project name, e.g., "felix-".
> >
> > So, apparently everyone else but Eclipse is doing it incorrectly. ;-)
>
> Finally, the truth well out! ;-) Seriously, prefixing with "felix"
> (whatever) would take care of most (but not all) of the collision
> concerns. The downside is that the approach is more complicated. It
> looks easy but how would you write down a guideline for newbies to follow.
> Something like "prefix your artifact id with your project name" might
> work. In cases where there are nested (sub) projects it is less clear.
> For example, we often have "core" and "ui" teams or "platform" sub
> projects in some "foo" project. Are those bundles then "foo.xxx",
> "foo.core.xxx" or "foo.platform.core.xxx"? Since the guideline is open to
> interpretation it is not a very strong convention. The FQDN convention is
> simple, clear and unambiguous. Note that in the examples here all that is
> really saved is the "org.apache" part of the name.
In Apache MINA, I decided to name the JAR files like this:
mina-<subproject name>-<sub-sub-project name>-...jar.
For example, there are JARs whose names are:
* mina-core
* mina-filter-compression
* mina-filter-ssl
* mina-integration-spring
* mina-integration-jmx (this doesn't exist yet. It's just for example.)
I understand Jeff's concern and it really becomes a problem as the number of
subprojects increase. But I think we can manage this at least within
Felix. For other projects outside of Felix which depends on Felix, they
will have a different Maven groupId, so I think it's fine.
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41 4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4 455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6
Re: JAR file naming (was Re: [Maven Plugin] Additional fixes...)
Posted by Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com>.
Trustin Lee wrote:
> On 6/6/06, Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com> wrote:
>>
>> Richard S. Hall wrote:
...
>> As simple as it is - I'm happy that such a naming convention would be
>> both clear and easy to use, and not have too many pitfalls for the
>> future.
>>
>> So I'd be happy to see this go to a vote.
>
>
> +1
I'm also fine with it and would like to see it go to a vote.
Enrique
Re: JAR file naming (was Re: [Maven Plugin] Additional fixes...)
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
On 6/6/06, Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com> wrote:
>
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
> > Trustin Lee wrote:
> >> In Apache MINA, I decided to name the JAR files like this:
> >>
> >> mina-<subproject name>-<sub-sub-project name>-...jar.
> >>
> >> For example, there are JARs whose names are:
> >>
> >> * mina-core
> >> * mina-filter-compression
> >> * mina-filter-ssl
> >> * mina-integration-spring
> >> * mina-integration-jmx (this doesn't exist yet. It's just for
> example.)
> >>
> >> I understand Jeff's concern and it really becomes a problem as the
> >> number of
> >> subprojects increase. But I think we can manage this at least within
> >> Felix. For other projects outside of Felix which depends on Felix,
> they
> >> will have a different Maven groupId, so I think it's fine.
> >
> > So, does this mean that we are going to use this approach in Felix? Is
> > this something that is ready to vote on now?
> >
> As simple as it is - I'm happy that such a naming convention would be
> both clear and easy to use, and not have too many pitfalls for the future.
>
> So I'd be happy to see this go to a vote.
+1
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41 4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4 455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6
Re: JAR file naming (was Re: [Maven Plugin] Additional fixes...)
Posted by Rob Walker <ro...@ascert.com>.
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Trustin Lee wrote:
>> In Apache MINA, I decided to name the JAR files like this:
>>
>> mina-<subproject name>-<sub-sub-project name>-...jar.
>>
>> For example, there are JARs whose names are:
>>
>> * mina-core
>> * mina-filter-compression
>> * mina-filter-ssl
>> * mina-integration-spring
>> * mina-integration-jmx (this doesn't exist yet. It's just for example.)
>>
>> I understand Jeff's concern and it really becomes a problem as the
>> number of
>> subprojects increase. But I think we can manage this at least within
>> Felix. For other projects outside of Felix which depends on Felix, they
>> will have a different Maven groupId, so I think it's fine.
>
> So, does this mean that we are going to use this approach in Felix? Is
> this something that is ready to vote on now?
>
As simple as it is - I'm happy that such a naming convention would be
both clear and easy to use, and not have too many pitfalls for the future.
So I'd be happy to see this go to a vote.
-- Rob
Re: JAR file naming (was Re: [Maven Plugin] Additional fixes...)
Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
Trustin Lee wrote:
> In Apache MINA, I decided to name the JAR files like this:
>
> mina-<subproject name>-<sub-sub-project name>-...jar.
>
> For example, there are JARs whose names are:
>
> * mina-core
> * mina-filter-compression
> * mina-filter-ssl
> * mina-integration-spring
> * mina-integration-jmx (this doesn't exist yet. It's just for example.)
>
> I understand Jeff's concern and it really becomes a problem as the
> number of
> subprojects increase. But I think we can manage this at least within
> Felix. For other projects outside of Felix which depends on Felix, they
> will have a different Maven groupId, so I think it's fine.
So, does this mean that we are going to use this approach in Felix? Is
this something that is ready to vote on now?
-> richard