I don't like this Clojar policy because it implies that library authors depend on the ownership of a website or an account on Github and/or Gitlab. Website domain names can be lost for a few reasons, so does Github/Gitlab accounts. Technically, the best choice is to use the group-id provided by Clojar and linked to the Clojar account, but it is not very aesthetical.
yup that's exactly right @lee, we already had this happen with Daedalus, and we have some more unreleased libs that will have to get a com.lambdaisland
prefix
are you changing the namespaces to include com
or just the group id in the coordinate?
I don't object to the policy, they do provide multiple ways to establish identity, including clojars itself. I'm all for having globally unambiguous names, I just thought that "lambdaisland" would be unambiguous enough. But I don't feel special enough to ask for an exception.
only the group id, we also have clojure.core
and not org.clojure.core
but this is a package name not an artifact group-id.
you still can have package name lambdaisland.foo
provided by the package org.lambdaisland/foo
for example
same as clojure.core
provided by the package org.clojure/clojure
aren't we saying the exact same thing? We are not renaming our namespaces, only the artifact, so namespace lambdaisland.foo
in org.lambdaisland/foo
, just like clojure.core
in org.clojure/clojure
?