What I'm led to believe is that CamelCase is the convention for
artifacts, and that NUnit might be an exception. For that reason, I
have <finalName>nunit.framework</finalName> in the POM rather than
break the convention on the artifact ID.
Is everyone ok with:
* CamelCase as the convention for artifact IDs
* using finalName for NUnit rather than changing the artifact ID
* selection of (b) below
If so, I'll proceed to set this up.
Thanks,
Brett
On 16/10/2008, at 4:11 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Brett Porter <
brett@...>
> wrote:
>> I would like to start getting those into central.
>>
>> I think there are these options:
>> (a) put them into
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 as is, ie NUnit :
>> NUnit.Framework
>> (b) put them into
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 with group IDs that
>> are more
>> maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework
>> (c) put them in a new repo such as
http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet as
>> is, ie
>> NUnit : NUnit.Framework
>> (d) put them in a new repo such as
http://repo1.maven.org/dotnet
>> with group
>> IDs that are more maven-like, ie org.nunit : NUnit.Framework
>>
>> I'm leaning towards (b). Thoughts? Any other options I've missed?
>
> I like (b) also, but I'm not sure about the capitalization... when I
> install NUnit, the file in the bin directory is just
> "nunit.framework.dll".
>
> --
> Wendy
--
Brett Porter
brett@...
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
