"project" or "subproject" or "module" or "component" or ... whatever. :-)
/dev/mrg
On 1/19/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> Sounds ok. If there are no other suggestions till Sunday, I'll use
> "unpublished".
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Jan 19, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>
> > How about unpublished instead of private?
> >
> >
> > On 1/19/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jan 19, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> >>
> >> > Seems fairly logical, but Subversion allows us to move things
> >> around
> >> > if it needs to be changed again.
> >>
> >> True, just trying not to do it too often to avoid upsetting local
> >> Eclipse workspaces.
> >>
> >>
> >> > I am a little confused by the "private" in the names, though.
> >> Maybe I
> >> > just don't understand what you were trying to do, but the term
> >> seems
> >> > to imply non-open source to me, which of course is not correct.
> >>
> >> Interesting, of course nothing like that was implied. "private" here
> >> means that the module at deployment time will be a part of another
> >> aggregated module. Such module should not be published as a
> >> standalone module in a public repository and should not be imported
> >> by Cayenne users directly. Just like a "private" variable in Java.
> >> Again, "private" == "do not publish in the repo".
> >>
> >> But then, I am not sure what Maven recommended practices are in this
> >> respect. This is totally my invention coming of a need to provide
> >> user-friendly modules (cayenne-client, cayenne-server) - the idea
> >> that breaks neat and clean Maven picture of the world :-)
> >>
> >> Andrus
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Jan 19 2007 - 13:11:29 EST