ant elder wrote:
On 8/22/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
Doing either of these things would mean changing the current location of the
spis of course. Are we ready for that kind of change?
We're planning on cutting the branch for the release tomorrow so I'm not at
all keen for a change like this to happen for that :) Post 1.0 we need to
keep the SPIs stable so its really between now and 1.0 for our final
opportunity to come up with a structure and SPIs we're all happy with. I
think we're ready for a clean up like this so should have a go at doing it.
...ant
+1 for not making that kind of change now.
I'm simply going through modules and making sure that their packages
contain enough of the module names, but I'm happy enough for now with
core-spi containing org.apache.tuscany.sca.core.* or contribution-impl
containing org.apache.tuscany.contribution.service.util for example.
While this new thread of thoughts about reorganizing the whole set of
SPIs and modules that contain them is interesting, I was a little
surprised to see my little question about sca.scope and vs
sca.core.scope start such an interesting discussion :) and I don't have
any good ideas about it at the moment, so I'll try to comment on the
subject... but later, probably after the 0.99 release.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
