> > 2. Any feature distributed by a project needs to have that projects name in > the feature name. To take the aries-jndi example, if karaf names a feature > aries-jndi, and aries wants to publish a jndi feature themselves, what can > they call it? I think karaf has to use "karaf-aries-jndi" and aries gets > "aries-jndi".
imho, if aries shipped a feature, the way to go would be to reuse that feature in Karaf and don't ship a different feature ourselves. > Of course one solution is to use a fully qualified name, and I don't think > they are really any more complicated than these partly-qualified names, > which is why I think we should keep them. It's not about being complicated (though I think it can create some confusion). It's about keeping things small and avoiding too much clutter. -- *Ioannis Canellos* * FuseSource <http://fusesource.com> ** Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com ** Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer Apache Gora <http://incubator.apache.org/gora/> Committer *
