Adoption Group 'projects' in maven central

[Chris Newland]

Thank you both for the feedback.

I'm in agreement with Dalibor's points - I'll use a
com.chrisnewland.jitwatch maven group ID but maintain the link to Adoption
via the existing java package structure and maven roles.

Kind regards,

Chris

On Wed, February 24, 2016 20:31, Martijn Verburg wrote:
> Hi Dalibor,
>
>
> I've got some extra clarification on this, inline.
>
>
> On 24 February 2016 at 16:38, dalibor topic <dalibor.topic at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> On 23.02.2016 14:20, Chris Newland wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>>
>> thank you for raising the question! It hasn't really come up much in
>> the past, as there were only two OpenJDK Projects that ended up on
>> Maven,
>> thanks to third party packagers.
>>
>> So I'll try to give a longer answer, with references, and so on, in
>> order to be able to refer back to it later, if necessary. ;)
>>
>> What is the opinion on having a maven central group id of
>> org.adoptopenjdk
>>> for Adoption projects?
>>>
>>
>> Looking at
>> https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-naming-conventions.html
>>
>>
>> "groupId will identify your project uniquely across all projects, so we
>>  need to enforce a naming schema. It has to follow the package name
>> rules, what means that has to be at least as a domain name you control"
>>
>> Given that adoptopenjdk.org is not a domain you control, using it as a
>> Maven group id would seem like a bad choice to me.
>>
>>
>
> We did own this and let it lapse but I'm hoping to get it back soon.
>
>
>
>> Official OpenJDK Projects (capital P) such as JMH use the maven group
>> id
>>> prefix org.openjdk but perhaps it would be useful to have a "junior"
>>> repo for projects (lowercase p) that Adoption is "incubating" ?
>>>
>>
>> I don't think that would be very useful, as that there is no separate
>> "incubation" process in OpenJDK. Projects in OpenJDK are created
>> following the process outlined at
>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#new-project .
>>
>>
>> In general, I don't think that trying to encourage the migration of
>> existing, established open source projects into the OpenJDK community is
>> a very good idea, unless there is a well-defined, obvious benefit for
>> JDK
>> Release Projects like JDK 9, such as the implementation of a new feature
>>  being considered for a future JDK release, with ongoing maintenance
>> being expected to be undertaken within the OpenJDK Community.
>>
>> If there isn't, then the amount of work necessary to get to the point
>> where a new Project can be proposed for discussion typically dwarfs any
>> potential benefits of being part of the OpenJDK Community for such
>> efforts.
>>
>> Even though that's very different from how other large open source
>> communities work, I'd argue that it's actually a good thing, as it keeps
>>  the OpenJDK Community largely focused on development of the JDK.
>>
>
> So Jitwatch could be seen as a valuable tool within the code tools
> Project.  I know that many of the Hotspot engineers use it (much like they
>  use JMH).  Perhaps Chris can discuss that with those groups though.
>
>
>> Reason for enquiring is that I've been asked to put JITWatch into maven
>>
>>> central so people can integrate it more easily
>>>
>>
>> I think that's a fine idea.
>>
>>
>> and would lke to keep the
>>> association with the Adoption group if possible.
>>>
>>
>> I believe that's what the Developer roles of the Maven POM are for -
>> for example, looking at https://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Developers you
>>  could provide the role 'OpenJDK Adoption Group Participant', to
>> establish the link back to this Group, or even 'OpenJDK Quality Outreach
>> participant' to make note of the fact that JITWatch is regularly and
>> well tested with upcoming JDK releases in its POM.
>>
>> The JITWatch Java package prefix is org.adoptopenjdk.jitwatch
>>
>>>
>>
>> According to Maven POM documentation at
>> https://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Maven_Coordinates ,
>>
>>
>> "Note that the dot-notated groupId does not have to correspond to the
>> package structure that the project contains."
>>
>> So from that perspective, I think it'd be fine to pick any domain name
>> that you control as your groupId.
>>
>> cheers, dalibor topic --
>> <http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
>> Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
>> <tel:+491737185961>
>>
>>
>> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 Hamburg
>>
>>
>> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
>> Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
>> Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
>>
>>
>> Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
>> Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
>> Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
>> Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher
>>
>>
>> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing
>> practices and products that help protect the environment
>>
>