Re: org.apache.j2g
I'm guessing one day there may be more then just a JBoss converter, so you may want to go with something like org.apache.geronimo.convert.jboss. I'm not sure "convert" is best word... maybe migrate. -dain On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
Re: org.apache.j2g
Yes, I know its not Mavenized, which is another of my concerns. But regaurdless of that, it seems fairly simply to just opened up the project in an IDE, repackage, then search/replace everything else to pick up the correct package names now... But... just as long as it gets done soonish, before we start getting folks using this tool. --jason On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: True, but this thing isn't even mavenized yet. So publishing is not a concern for me right now. But I will mark this as a todo. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:19 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I'm fine to wait to change this a little longer... but as soon as we have to start producing artifacts, publishing to repos or making assemblies then this should be fixed. But is it really that muck work to do a global search and replace "org.apache.j2g" -> "org.apache.geronimo.j2g" ? I do this all the time with jEdit... its quite simple and quick. --jason On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:12 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: Yeah we should insert ".geronimo" before j2g, but I just got done refactoring alot of stuff and don't want to spend the time redoing it all overagain. Its not just the packages that would have to get changed again, but bundle id's, manifest references, extension points, etc... Since Its currently in sandbox, we can just make it a requirement before we move it out of sandbox. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
Re: org.apache.j2g
True, but this thing isn't even mavenized yet. So publishing is not a concern for me right now. But I will mark this as a todo. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:19 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I'm fine to wait to change this a little longer... but as soon as we have to start producing artifacts, publishing to repos or making assemblies then this should be fixed. But is it really that muck work to do a global search and replace "org.apache.j2g" -> "org.apache.geronimo.j2g" ? I do this all the time with jEdit... its quite simple and quick. --jason On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:12 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: Yeah we should insert ".geronimo" before j2g, but I just got done refactoring alot of stuff and don't want to spend the time redoing it all overagain. Its not just the packages that would have to get changed again, but bundle id's, manifest references, extension points, etc... Since Its currently in sandbox, we can just make it a requirement before we move it out of sandbox. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
Re: org.apache.j2g
I'm fine to wait to change this a little longer... but as soon as we have to start producing artifacts, publishing to repos or making assemblies then this should be fixed. But is it really that muck work to do a global search and replace "org.apache.j2g" -> "org.apache.geronimo.j2g" ? I do this all the time with jEdit... its quite simple and quick. --jason On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:12 PM, Sachin Patel wrote: Yeah we should insert ".geronimo" before j2g, but I just got done refactoring alot of stuff and don't want to spend the time redoing it all overagain. Its not just the packages that would have to get changed again, but bundle id's, manifest references, extension points, etc... Since Its currently in sandbox, we can just make it a requirement before we move it out of sandbox. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
Re: org.apache.j2g
I agree this is inconsistent and I think we need to change this to something like: o.a.g.tools.j2g or o.a.g.apps.j2g. Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
Re: org.apache.j2g
Yeah we should insert ".geronimo" before j2g, but I just got done refactoring alot of stuff and don't want to spend the time redoing it all overagain. Its not just the packages that would have to get changed again, but bundle id's, manifest references, extension points, etc... Since Its currently in sandbox, we can just make it a requirement before we move it out of sandbox. -sachin On Mar 26, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: I asked about this before, but got no answer. Why is the code for "geronimo/sandbox/j2g" using "org.apache.j2g" as a package name? This seems *very* inconsistent wrt other codelines which are hosted by the geronimo svn. Why? --jason
