Looks like .mdl is already taken. http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/online/formats/mdl/ +1 for ,mod
Thanks Anita --- Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 > > - sachin > > > > On May 6, 2006, at 3:24 AM, John Sisson wrote: > > > I also was just about to suggest a .module extension, but after > > further thought, having an extension longer than three characters > > is likely to reintroduce the filename length issues (under geronimo > > > \repository) on Windows during the builds. > > > > How about .mod or .mdl. > > > > John > > > > Jason Dillon wrote: > >> I'd be happy if we never ended up calling any file a .[a-zA-Z]ar. > > >> I think that the ear/war/rar thing is lame to start with, the > >> folks that continue to use the same lame extension naming system > >> (sar, har, dar, car) just perpetuate this silly system that Sun > >> dropped on us. > >> > >> If we need to use extensions to clarify what something is, then > >> lets use something more sensible. Like for a module, why not just > > >> use .module? If you want to still say its a jar, > >> then .module.jar, but please lets not make it a .mar. > >> > >> --jason > >> > >> > >> On May 5, 2006, at 7:40 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: > >> > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
