I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it is to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long as possible for our users sanity sake. Everett On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote: > Hey folks, > > I was just creating a package and realized that it might not necessarily be > correct. > > What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level Apache > project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*". > > Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the trail > on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts? > > /jd
