Re: Open source ivy files project?

> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Xavier Hanin <xavier.hanin@...>
> wrote:
>
> > > *Organizations.* Regarding choice of "organization" for each module:
> why
> > > not
> > > use the name of the project as the organization for all of the ivy
> > > modules?
> > > That is what we do internally in our "enterprise repository".
> > >
> > > This seems obvious to me, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what
> > > "organization"
> > > is supposed to be for. I've always thought of it as referring to the
> > > people
> > > that created the *module* (not the *artifacts*).
> > >
> > > If you don't do it that way, you eliminate the possibility of multiple
> > > packagers of the same stuff, which would be bad (e.g., think about how
> > > many
> > > different Linux distributions there are).
> >
> > I think I would try to follow maven 2 conventions, just for the ease of
> > use
> > for people coming from maven2, and because I think they are pretty good
> > when
> > followed. Obviously apache commons-* would be renamed since they don't
> > follow the convention. For java projects, I think using the main package
> > name of the main module in the project makes sense most of the time.
>
>
> I apologize for my ignorance... Two questions:
>
>   1. I know little about maven. What are the "maven 2 conventions"?