[hibernate-dev] groupId vs artifactId

[Hardy Ferentschik]

+1 If we would have started this earlier, we would have a much nicer  
namespace under  
https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/public/org/hibernate/

Obviously we cannot get rid of/change the existing structure by changing  
the groupIds of existing projects, because we have to keep the old  
artifacts.
Changing the groupId would only increase the "chaos"

For a completely new project it makes, however, sense to introduce this  
additional level in the groupId. So yes to, org.hibernate.ogm

The artifactId should stay, however, hibernate-ogm-core. Remember the  
artifactId determines the name of the jar file. I prefer
hibernate-ogm-core over ogm-core.jar.

My 0.02$

--Hardy

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:52:22 +0100, Emmanuel Bernard  
<emmanuel at hibernate.org> wrote:

> Today we have the following approach for most of our projects
>
> groupId: org.hibernate
> artifactId hibernate-search-parent, hibernate-search etc
>
> Since I'm working on the ogm packaging, I wonder if we should do  
> something like
>
> groupId: org.hibernate.ogm
> artifactId hibernate-ogm-parent, hibernate-ogm-core etc
>
> or even
>
> groupId: org.hibernate.ogm
> artifactId ogm-parent, ogm-core etc
>
> thoughts? I don't mind the existing approach except that the  
> org/hibernate directory is getting crowded, we are too prolific :)
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev