On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 14:42 +0600, Deepal Jayasinghe wrote: > Hi all; > > +1 for proposal , > > But I have some comments , > rather than introducing new description file I like to have service.xml > insider archive file and which root element can either be <service> or > <services> , if the root element is <service> I will create > ServiceGroupDescription by giving archive name as group name and the group > only contain one service. In the other hand if the root element is > <services> ServiceGruopDescription will be created by giving archive name as > Service Group name and all the service in service.xml will belong to that > service group.
+1, but how about a slight variation: s/service.xml/services.xml/. That makes it slightly clearer - so we're not introducing an additional description file but rather just renaming the current one. Only bad thing is we'd be changing what we've had so far .. OTOH adding service groups is a significant new function. In any case, I can live with either name. Sanjiva.
