On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 12:21 +0100, Aidan Skinner wrote: > On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday 22 August 2008 5:32:09 am Aidan Skinner wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Alan Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> There's a legal reason for using incubating in the artifcat name[1], > >> so the tarfile will still have that in there, the spec itself should > >> be ok as 0.3 though. On graduation we'd need to change our names to > >> apache-qpid instead of qpid- > >> > > > > Why wait till graduation? You probably should do that now if you're going > > to > > rebuild things (which you have to do for the java stuff at the minimum due > > to > > the missing LICENSE/etc...) > > A name change like that is going to require a bit of coordination (eg. > downstream packagers), and it's not something I want to arbitrarily do > without a bit of discussion first. I also don't want to slip M3 for > this. > AFAIK the only artifact affected by changing the configure.ac PACKAGE (apart from the tarball name itself) is the name of the RPM .spec file. That should never have been in the apache project in the first place and Red Hat isn't using it anymore. I'll remove it to reduce confusion. So there is probably no downstream impact to changing the name, but...
> Changing the name and version numbering scheme at the same time seems > like the best bet to me as it leaves us with only one pain point. It is prudent, so don't feel obliged to change it for M3 unless there's a compelling reason to do so.
