> >> We seem to have no end of bad names. None of {api,commons,core}
> >> are meaningful. api is just a placeholder for javax.jcr.
> > btw, i thought, org.apache.jackrabbit is a placeholder for javax.jcr
> > :-)
>
> cute.
please? org.apache.jackrabbit.api was not though to be a placeholder
for javax.jcr, it was though of the API of jackrabbit. have you ever
tried to register a nodetype in jackrabbit without using 'core'
methods?
> >> core should be o.a.j.jcr.
> > i disagree. o.a.j.core is totally ok.
>
> core is what you get with a segfault, which is why many Unix backup
> systems won't save anything named "core" or under a "core" directory.
speeking of bad naming...it's a pity they havn't named it
'processimage' or something more descriptive, since that's what it is.
'core' is as descriptive as 'apple' or 'potatoe'.
> "o.a.j.jcr" makes it clear that the code within implements the
> "javax.jcr" interface.
well, is still disagree...
> I am really looking forward to getting the tree together again
> so that we can start the 1.0 release discussion.
perhaps we could vote on:
1) reverting 'the great split'
2) 'dropping' the jackrabbit API
3) renaming org.apache.jackrabbit.core to org.apache.jackrabbit.jcr
4) moving all 'commons' to org.apache.jackrabbit.util.
cheers, tobi
--
-----------------------------------------< [EMAIL PROTECTED] >---
Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel
T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
-----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---
