No replies so i'd still like to do this now. Will wait till tomorrow to see if there are any more replies.
...ant On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:35 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > But OSGi bundles are just jars, so that doesn't seem like enough of a > reason to deviate from the norm to me. If people really object to changing > this now then i guess i'm ok with leaving it till after M1, but if the plan > is to change it eventually i'd rather do it now and that fits in with the > "theme" of M1 being sorting out the build and distribution structures. I > don't mind volunteering to do the work. > > ...ant > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote: > >> What we have under "modules" now are not plain jars. They are OSGi >> bundles. I don't see a strong reason to rename it to "lib". Can we just >> leave it as is to avoid extra work for 2.0 M1? >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> *From:* ant elder <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 04, 2009 5:50 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Rename "modules" folder to "lib" >> >> I think we should rename the "modules folder to be called "lib". The name >> "lib" is used almost universally in Java projects for the place the jars go, >> the name "modules" is a hangover from 1.x where it was used as a place for >> just the tuscany module jars to keep them separate from the all jar. Unless >> anyone has a good reason not to i'll make this change in a couple of days. >> >> ...ant >> >> > >
