+1 for keeping it (after I was convinced by simo :))
2012/11/28 Simone Tripodi <[email protected]> > yes, autobind is a component that I haven't touched yet - feel free to > play with it if you have some spare time! > > TIA! > -Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi > http://www.99soft.org/ > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Simone Tripodi > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I am honestly for keeping the onami- prefix, the reason is that > >> groupId is just metadata, artifactId is also the name that will be > >> assigned to the produced artifact - once on the filesystem, while > >> `autobind` would be self-explanatory, `logging` would be a little > >> confusing :P > > > > OK makes sense. Then lets use the prefix for all components from now on? > > > >> > >> Thanks! > >> -Simo > >> > >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ > >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi > >> http://www.99soft.org/ > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Christian Grobmeier > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Autobind: > >>> > >>> <artifactId>autobind-parent</artifactId> > >>> > >>> Loggin: > >>> > >>> <artifactId>onami-logging-log4j</artifactId> > >>> <artifactId>onami-logging-parent</artifactId> > >>> > >>> Can we agree on either prefixing everything with onami or with > >>> removing the prefix for every component? > >>> > >>> As there is a groupId containing org.apache.onami I would prefer > >>> removing the prefix > >>> > >>> Any objections? > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> Christian > >>> > >>> -- > >>> http://www.grobmeier.de > >>> https://www.timeandbill.de > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.grobmeier.de > > https://www.timeandbill.de > -- Viele Grüße/Best Regards Daniel Manzke
