On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote: >> We currently have two extensions that does not follow the naming >> pattern we have of extension/extension-runtime, and these are >> binding-atom-abdera and implementation-bpel-ode. >> >> Should we rename these extensions to properly follow the naming >> convention we have been using for other extensions ? >> >> -- >> Luciano Resende >> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >> > > In 2.x or 1.x? > > I would say this is a 2.x job to tidy these up rather than revisiting > in 1.x. In 2.x binding-ws-axis2 doesn't fit either. > > Simon >
My 2 cents ... Leave 1.x alone as changing these could break user builds It wont be a surprise after the last couple of week that I'd be in favour of changing the 2.x names so we consistently use -runtime. We don't have multiple impls of any extension in 2.x and when we do we can just add a -runtime-foo. ...ant
