At 04:01 10/4/01 +0200, Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>The proposal/org.apache.framework is clean in structure,
>the proposal/org.apache.avalon is not (just try drawing up
>a package dependency graph for proposal/org.apache.avalon and
>you will see what I mean. Bottom line - this is back to the
>question of package naming that we were discussing earlier.
>
>I propose the following:
>
> 1. the current proposal/org.apache.framework be renamed
> to proposal/org.apache.avalon (on the grounds already
> covered in numerous emails relating to brand)
Sounds fine to me.
> 2. that the current proposal/org.apache.avalon be renamed
> to proposal/org.apache.avalon.dev
-1 as it doesn't make sense conceptually
* mixes component and framework aspects
* mixes stable and non-stable aspects
* doesn't make it clearer what dev is supposed to do
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
