Re: [gemini-dev] Gemini artifact names

[Mike Keith <michael.keith@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Costin,

For artifact id's I agree that we could use 
"gemini-<subprojectPneumonic>", but that for publication they should be 
fully expanded. Similarly, for package names it is probably okay to use 
a subproject pneumonic (for example Gemini Management is deciding to use 
org.eclipse.gemini.mgmt as its base package name). I am not sure if that 
is going to cause problems if it differs from what was specified in the 
original project creation application, though.

-Mike

On 4/16/2010 11:39 AM, Costin Leau wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm in the process of changing Spring DM to Gemini and I was wondering
> what conventions do we have in place for Gemini artifacts?
> In my case, I settled for gemini-bp-core, gemini-bp-extender and so on
> since gemini-blueprint-XXX seemed too verbose.
> For maven publication, I picked the group "org.eclipse.gemini.blueprint"
>
> Any opinions?
>
>