I personally would like to propose the following structure: trunk/jndi trunk/jpa I think they should be migrated to maven, package renamed, etc...
I also think that where it makes sense, having not too fine grained bundles is better. I don't really see the point in having two separate bundles for the jndi stuff, given both parts will have to be implemented anyway. Or at least, we should do as it's for blueprint, and provide a single bundle in addition to smaller ones if others think it might be useful. Also, for com.ibm.osgi.util, unless there are plans to actually use it in other bundles, i would also include it in the jpa one or at least embed this class as a private package if it will be reused. I'd be happy to help with the maven stuff if needed. 2009/10/1 Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]>: > Hi, I have just committed r820722 - the initial contribution from IBM > [1]. There is a readme [2]. The next step is to discuss & move over to > the trunk. The Software Grant Agreement has been sent to [email protected] > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/contrib/ibm > [2] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/contrib/ibm/README > > Cheers, > Jeremy > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
