I think that the relocation POMs mentioned by Andreas solve the
problem nicely.
More generally though... my preference is to use org.eclipse.golo as
the groupId unless doing so creates an onerous burden on the project
team or adopter community.
Built project artifacts (at least release and major milestones) need
to be on the Eclipse download server, but we have no other specific
distribution requirements. You can publish artifacts to Maven in
whatever way makes the most sense to you and the target community.
Likewise for Bintray or where-ever else your community will expect
to find them.
HTH,
Wayne
On 08/07/15 08:40 AM, Gunnar
Wagenknecht wrote:
1. Shall we switch our artefacts groupId to `org.eclipse.golo`?
How large is your current adopter community? I can imagine supporting a request for continuing publishing under you existing group id in Maven central if a change would be too disruptive for your existing community. However, I'm not sure if we (the PMC) can make that decision or if EMO (and possible the board) would have to approve it. Wayne, can you help me out here? :)
--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc