> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Peter Donald wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I think we need to mark sandbox code clearly as being > sandbox code. To do this > >we could require that components in this place are put in > the package. > > > >org.apache.avalon.sandbox.X > > > >This will make it very clear to users what the status of > code is and thus they > >wont be misled into thinking that it is anything it is not. > > > >Thoughts/Votes? > > > > > -1 > > That just makes for more work for users and developers. > The status of sandbox content is well documented - both on > the site and > in respective packages. > > http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/sandbox/warnings.html >
-1 for the same reasons. Sandbox should reflect as close as possible what the end-user will see. If we force a package name change as the last stage, that introduces a known risk to early adopters and we will have less feedback. The warning that the codebase can change dramatically at any time until it is released should be good enough. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
