[jbossdeveloper] [Proposal] One BOM for Wildfly/EAP 7

[Rafael Benevides]

Hi Max,

I believe that there are small tiny differences between them:  - Just 
the supported managed dependencies.

It's like viewing from an "enterprise" perspective: They are all "JBoss 
BOMs"  (groupId) and here are the different products BOMs supported by 
Red Hat (artifactId)

I think it would be too odd if we have:

- org.jboss.bom.<product-code>:jboss-javaee-7.0 (same artifactId for all)
or
- org.jboss.bom.<product-code>:jboss-javaee-7.0-<product-code-again>


On 4/13/15 08:34, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2015, at 15:28, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>
>> I was thinking a little bit more about the naming.
>>
>> Actually we use
>>
>> org.jboss.bom.<product-code>:jboss-javaee-6.0-with-<project>.
>>
>> Examples
>> - org.jboss.bom.eap:jboss-javaee-6.0-with-security
>> - org.jboss.bom.eap:jboss-javaee-6.0-with-tools
>> - org.jboss.bom.brms:jboss-javaee-6.0-with-drools
>> - org.jboss.bom.jdg:jboss-javaee-6.0-with-infinispan.
>>
>> My proposal is to return the groupId to org.jboss.bom and use
>> org.jboss.bom:jboss-javaee-7.0-<product-code>
>>
>> Examples:
>> - org.jboss.bom:jboss-javaee-7.0-eap
>> - org.jboss.bom:jboss-javaee-7.0-brms
>> - org.jboss.bom:jboss-javaee-7.0-jdg
>
> unless there are small tiny differences between these three
> this seems wrong to leave the actual difference to be in the qualifier 
> of the version.
>
> Having the group artefact be different seem to be the right approach 
> (at least following
> standard maven conventions ?)
>
>
> /max
> http://about.me/maxandersen