I thought Raymond had replied [1] and you said that would be ok to leave this for M1 [2]. For me, I'm OK with modules.
[1] http://markmail.org/thread/h4cc4gwvgundrsoh [2] http://markmail.org/thread/ydtuypvzxxr3iu4m On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:31 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >>> 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 >>> >> > > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
