Skip to main content

Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Archived » Tycho » Re: Gemini Blueprint 1.0.0.M1 ships
Re: Gemini Blueprint 1.0.0.M1 ships [message #549734] Tue, 27 July 2010 18:36
Werner Keil is currently offline Werner KeilFriend
Messages: 1085
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


What's the reason a POM from the Blueprint (hopefully outdated ;-) promotes
one form of Maven artifactId, while Gemini itself uses another?!

I lead an Eclipse project (UOMo) where the only non-Eclipse dependency is
also shaped by a group of experts around

The discussion about the final artifact name lead us to your Blueprints
which as of M2 still use a "dash" style naming of artifactId:

Gemini itself uses the OSGi bundle style like this:
<artifactId>org.eclipse.gemini.naming.impl.bundle-Incubation </artifactId>

Any reasons why this is inconsistent?

Hopefully Tycho may also shed some light on this and what it promotes as
best practice for artifactId naming, especially for OSGi-enabled


Content-Type: text/xml;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;

<?xml version=3D"1.0"?>=0A=
<name>Gemini Blueprint IO</name>=0A=
Eclipse Gemini Blueprint IO abstract classes. Provides Resource, =
ResourceLoader and ResourcePatternResolver for OSGi environments.=0A=
</dependency> =0A=

Previous Topic:Re: Gemini Blueprint 1.0.0.M1 ships
Next Topic:Building Projects by Manifest First
Goto Forum:

Current Time: Mon Nov 12 18:34:46 GMT 2018

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01789 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software

Back to the top