I'll defer to the body of committers as to how important this is and if it should go into for 1.1.
Personally I don't think it really matters what the name is. ModuleId has its own set of baggage
and so will everything else. I'm more concerned about another disruptive change to the users which
will eventually require them to change their plans. Even if we decide to provide a conversion
utility to bridge the gap for now we'll eventually deprecate it and force them to change.
My personal opinion is -0 and weould prefer to leave it alone.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I think now is the time to discuss if we want to commit the change from
configId to moduleId. If we decide to commit the patch, the timing of
the actual commit will be determined by Kevan to have the smallest
impact on the TCK. The patch makes the following changes:
o Renamed root element from "configuration" to "module"
o Renamed environment element from "configId" to "moduleId"
o Renamed schema from "geronimo-config-1.1.xsd" to
"geronimo-module-1.1.xsd"
Based on conversations over the past few days, I think we all agree that
"configuration" is a poor name choice, and we want to change it. I also
think that we all agree that if we are going to make the change we
should change the xml schemas before 1.1 ships to have minimal impact on
users (we already have schema changes going into 1.1).
Should we commit?
-dain
