We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Right now the Maven coordinates are
<groupId>jakarta.nosql</groupId> <artifactId>demo</artifactId>
That is not good because it overlaps with the API/Spec namespace and groupId. Either we should harmonize it with other demo projects here like https://github.com/JNOSQL/artemis-demo/blob/master/pom.xml (and probably move that from "org.eclipse.jnosql.artemis" to something like "org.eclipse.jnosql.demo" for the same reason) or seek a place either under "jakartaee.examples" (https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-examples) or "jakarta.tutorial" (see https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tutorial-examples)
Advise by the PMC, Spec Committee and others are welcome especially when it comes to harmonizing those kinds of namespaces.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The Java package name should also match, see jakarta.tutorial.decorators from a CDI decorator example.
Sorry, something went wrong.
I guess that should be: jakarta.tutorial.nosql
jakarta.tutorial.nosql
No branches or pull requests
Right now the Maven coordinates are
That is not good because it overlaps with the API/Spec namespace and groupId.
Either we should harmonize it with other demo projects here like https://github.com/JNOSQL/artemis-demo/blob/master/pom.xml (and probably move that from "org.eclipse.jnosql.artemis" to something like "org.eclipse.jnosql.demo" for the same reason) or seek a place either under "jakartaee.examples" (https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-examples) or "jakarta.tutorial" (see https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tutorial-examples)
Advise by the PMC, Spec Committee and others are welcome especially when it comes to harmonizing those kinds of namespaces.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: