[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-517?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13896320#comment-13896320
]
Jozef Hartinger commented on DELTASPIKE-517:
Weld always returns an
+1 for renaming to container-controler and both under modules
2014-02-10 12:28 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com:
-1 for cdi unit (name already in use for the exact same purpose)
+1 for renaming cdictrl to container-control
+1 for aligning both under modules (even though
We could rename the module, but I'd rather not move it under modules because
they don't have the same parent. And we also must not change the artifactId as
cdictrl is already heavily used in projects.
LieGrue,
strub
On Monday, 10 February 2014, 13:05, Thomas Andraschko
Can't we change the parent?
IMHO renaming isn't a problem if we do it BEFORE 1.0.
2014-02-10 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de:
We could rename the module, but I'd rather not move it under modules
because they don't have the same parent. And we also must not change the
+1 there is no issue with api-/name-/... changes before v1. we had a
similar change in codi (before v1) and there was no issue with it.
(+ we emphasized the possibility of such changes from the very beginning).
if we change something like that, we should also re-visit the
security-module (the
exactly. We're still pre 1.0. Now's the time to do it.
It won't affect existing projects since the versions they're on are
still out there. Only if they want to upgrade.
I think changing the parent structure is the right thing to do.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Gerhard Petracek
Hello! By following the discussions you seem to draw closer and closer to
1.0. I think it would be appropriate to end the project name (or was that
settled?) and logotype discussions before.
I myself is -1 for name change and +1 for the logotype that's currently in
the header
Cheers!
+1 John
+1 for using the logo in the header
2014-02-10 14:59 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com:
Project name was already established as a part of graduation. Unless
we see a need to have a rename, we should stick with it (a good
example of why a rename is needed is OpenEJB -
@logo:
i hope we will see some nice suggestions soon (see [1]).
regards,
gerhard
[1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DESIGN-520
2014-02-10 15:03 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko andraschko.tho...@gmail.com:
+1 John
+1 for using the logo in the header
2014-02-10 14:59 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament
