Are you ok with @DeltaSpike, John? So we could continue with it?
2014-02-26 9:40 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: > +1 Romain > > > 2014-02-24 21:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > yes but until now everybody seems ok >> >> if we have multiple proposal we can see if we do another vote or if >> some change their vote, no? >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> >> 2014-02-24 21:00 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com>: >> > As per OP email, it's only a proposed value. >> > >> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> seems we agree on DeltaSpike, no? >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2014-02-24 17:24 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com>: >> >>> I agree with the use of the name (@DeltaSpike) but to me this vote is >> >>> not useful unless we actually know what the proposed new name is. >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> >>> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> if it is global it should be the name of project IMHO >> >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >> >>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> >>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> >>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> >>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> 2014-02-24 16:54 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com>: >> >>>>> I'm inclined to -1 (veto) this as it's not clear from the vote what >> >>>>> the new qualifier is. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Cody Lerum <cody.le...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> To be clear it is @DeltaSpike (capital D capital S) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> -C >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:16 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> >> wrote: >> >>>>>>> +1 >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> The Qualifier itself should sit in core-api. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> LieGrue, >> >>>>>>> strub >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Monday, 24 February 2014, 11:03, Antoine Sabot-Durand < >> anto...@sabot-durand.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> +1 for @Deltaspike qualifier : it gives a solution to manage >> co-existence of DS feature and future CDI standardized DS features. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>Le 24 févr. 2014 à 10:16, Romain Manni-Bucau < >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> +1 as well for a global qualifier @DeltaSPike >> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >> >>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> >>>>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> >>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> >>>>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> 2014-02-24 9:52 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko < >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for @DeltaSpike -> @Inject @DeltaSpike ServletContext >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 2014-02-24 9:52 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko < >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> based on the discusstion in "Servlet Module - Do we really >> need @Web?", >> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to call a vote. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> The idea is to replace @Web with a common qualifier because >> @Web is >> >>>>>>>>>>> redudant: >> >>>>>>>>>>> @Inject @Web ServletContext. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> We could also reuse this qualifier for other features in the >> future. >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Should we replace it? >> >>>>>>>>>>> 2) What about the name? @DeltaSpike? >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thomas >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> > >
