<cheek><tongue>Use of "core" as a package/directory name is mildly off in a UNIX environment as the directory might be confused with a core dump! ;n)</tongue></cheek>
Phil :n) -----Original Message----- From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 20/04/2005 15:28 To: Ant Developers List Cc: Subject: RE: Antlib package names > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > We shouldnt plan the name only for the svn-package. > That´s a general question for future extensions. > > > Von: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Perhaps it could be just "org.apache.ant.svn" - i.e. drop antlibs. Actually, Peter might have a point. Why not drop antlibs, and to indeed differentiate future extensions from Ant core, then add an explicit org.apache.ant.core package, which opens up the app-top-level org.apache.ant package for antlibs. So we'd have: org.apache.ant.core - Ant Core - explicit enough org.apache.ant.svn - SNV AntLib org.apache.ant.foo - FOO AntLib org.apache.ant.bar - BAR AntLib etc... I think I like this scheme better in fact. Use a more explicit package for Core, while offering shorter names for AntLibs. --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
