Obsolete
Status Update
Comments
hi...@google.com <hi...@google.com> #2
[Empty comment from Monorail migration]
br...@google.com <br...@google.com> #3
[Empty comment from Monorail migration]
da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #4
[Empty comment from Monorail migration]
ek...@google.com <ek...@google.com> #5
[Monorail components: SteeringCommittee]
ek...@google.com <ek...@google.com> #6
[Monorail components: -ESC]
is...@google.com <is...@google.com> #7
Edits were made to reflect the following in Monorail: auto-CCs.
Description
I would like to ask ESC opinion on this discusion:
Particularly, should we:
1. short cut the registration of new group id
for plugin specific artifacts, and publish plugin specific artifacts to gerrit group id?
2. If not using gerrit own group for plugins artifacts, should we
request one new group id for gerrit plugins:
"com.google.gerrit.plugins" and publish say checks and verify-status
rest-api-client standalone libraries in this group?
3. Or should every plugin request its own group id:
"com.google.gerrit.plugins.checks"
"com.google.gerrit.plugins.verify-status"
[...]