Sounds like the consensus is to change it (although I don't remember a formal vote although I do
remember the discussion). For my part it sounds like we're changing the configId to moduleId to
decrease confusion. It seems odd that the modules are called CARs (Configuration Archives) or some
such thing. I think we're making the server more confusing because now less things actually line up
from a naming perspective.
It just doesn't feel like we're giving our users a lot of stability.
As David said, Just my $0.02.
I would like to see more input from people though. I've been travelling so I must have missed the
vote to put it in.
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