David
@shakuzen based on the responses from the Jetty team, it seems like it's better to add the `help wanted` label back.
I'm still not sure what I want to do here, but I am leaning towards just letting every plugin manage their own release. The way the website is set up...
> In my opinion having OpenApi available on maven central is a must to reduce friction for non experienced users. It can be on maven central without being under io.javalin...
> Well yes, by registering our own namespace on sonatype, using our own domain, same way you did for Javalin. Do you consider that too much friction?
> I do. Every plugin would need to be registered as a sonatype project, on the other hand, if every plugin developer uses their own repo users would need to...
> @rbygrave Maybe use a sub groupId like io.javalin.plugin ? Yes, I'm leaning against this now. I think I will go for `io.javalin.community`,
> @zugazagoitia Maybe we could skip either the javalin or plugin part on the artifact id? Otherwise a plugin could result in something like io.javalin.plugin:javalin-ssl-plugin where we're repeating both javalin...
Latest update is that we have asked for sub-subgroups, so `io.javalin.community.ssl:javalin-ssl-plugin`, `io.javalin.community.openapi:javalin-redoc-plugin`. I guess we will continue down this path with asking for more groups if more people want to...
Thanks @MairwunNx! Is this something you've had performance issues with in your app, or is it an assumption about it being an expensive operation?
I was thinking in the main repo, and adding it to the bundle.