Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Friday 26 August 2005 07:19, Richard S. Hall wrote:
If we really want to
draw a distinction, we could use 'r4-bundles' and 'bundles' or the
original suggestion.
So the question is; Is it important??
I think it is probably not important at all initially, since the numbers will
be small. But assuming that multiple implementations of the standard services
defined in the specification, and dozens of "unrelated" bundles, it could
make sense.
However, other mechanisms could be employed and we can always adjust the
strategy in respect to svn layout about this later.
I am +/-0 on either way.
I otherwise agrees with Richards reasoning around why "optional" is not a good
name.
I agree. Probably not an important distinction. In an effort to avoid
YAGNI (you aren't gonna need it) we should start with just "bundles."
And "optional" was not a good name choice on my part.
Enrique
