I'm going to be away 17->17 June (my sister-in-law is expecting #4) with limited time for James. I won't have the time to integrate an automated solution to JAMES-1269 into the build before then.
I prefer using a naming schema for artifact ids that uses a "apache" prefix. This has the disadvantage of length artifact names but eases and speeds maintenance of artifact licensing in complex binaries. Once we have an integrated automated system, this shouldn't be such an issue (though I like the branding). I would like to suggest that we consider prefixing the server jars (james-server-* -> apache-james-server-*) and next release of protocols (protocols-* -> apache-james-protocols-*) Opinions? Objections? Robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
