Hi Robert,
I don't have big preferences here. I just would like to get beta1
released soon. And every "change" will block us more, so I'm more
concerned about JAMES-1269 a lot more then about name changes etc.
Bye,
Norman
Am 16.06.2011 09:26, schrieb Robert Burrell Donkin:
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
