+1, more so because other apps not using much of lift 'web'by stuff could use this too.
Couple of options: 1. lift-common (along the lines of Jakarta Commons - not intuitive, but Java developers used to Jakarta Commons would be able to relate) 2. Actually naming lift-base as lift-util and lift-util as something else. This is backward incompatible though, but then again this is bleeding edge SNAPSHOT afterall :-P 3. Something else that's better ? Cheers, Indrajit On 29/09/09 11:38 PM, Timothy Perrett wrote: > > OK - that I can understand. > > Could I suggest however that we find a different name? Both myself and > Marius were a little confused by that - nothing springs to mind, but > perhaps lets bounce around some names. > > Cheers, Tim > > On 29 Sep 2009, at 18:41, David Pollak wrote: > >> lift-util is weighted very much toward web development. lift-base >> will be generic. >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
