On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is probably useful, but I'm hesitant on the namespace -- if a > standardized "auth" feature emerges, we'd have a conflict. I think this came > up before. Perhaps we should make all shindig implementation packages name > an underscore suffix to avoid this? Something like gadgets.auth_. We could > even put it under the "shindig" namespace to really avoid conflicts (and we > could migrate gadgets.config to this as well).
shindig.auth attached to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-264 Cheers, Brian
