>If we keep that style, it would be more logical to have: > >apache-jena-fuseki > >Does that seem sensible?
I think it makes sense, +1 for apache-jena-fuseki Bruno >________________________________ > From: Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 1:12 PM >Subject: Rename artifact jena-fuseki-dist as apache-jena-fuseki? > > >Fuseki2 comes in various binary forms. One is the distribution >containing files fuseki-server.jar and fuseki.war. > >Currently, this is module jena-fuseki-dist and the resulting file is >jena-fuseki-dist-VER.zip/.tar.gz > >c.f Fuseki1: the distribution is the slightly different >jena-fuseki-VER-distribution.zip/.tar.gz > >Our other delivery artifacts are > >apache-jena-VER.zip > For the main jars > >apache-jena-libs for the external facing POM for the main dependencies. > >If we keep that style, it would be more logical to have: > >apache-jena-fuseki > >Does that seem sensible? > > Andy > > >
