I think at the top level, org.apache.wave seems acceptable to all. ~Michael
On Jun 15, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Paulo Pires wrote: > I agree with org.apache.wave, it makes perfect sense. > > Regarding modules, I for one would like to see, at least ,the following > modules, if they are to exist: > * org.apache.wave.csprotocol - client/server protocol > * org.apache.wave.api - Robot and Gadget APIs and eventually the much > wanted client API > * org.apache.wave.server - the server (concurrencycontrol, federation, > model, etc.) > * org.apache.wave.webclient - the GWT webclient > > Cheers, > PP > > On 15/06/12 16:23, Lennard de Rijk wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Michael MacFadden < >> michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> We are selecting the top level maven group id and wanted to get some >>> feedback. There are two thoughts: >>> >>> >>> 1) Very top level group id. I am thinking that everything coming out of >>> the apache wave project could be: >>> >>> org.apache.wave >>> >>> >>> 2) Wave in a Box group id I am thinking potentially: >>> >>> org.apache.wave.wiab >>> >>> >> I would go with box instead of wiab. >> >> >>> >>> The rationale being the long term we hope that the wave project might >>> produce gadgets robots, extensions and stuff beyond just wiab. We have not >>> discussed the final module structure under this namespace. >>> >>> Comments welcome. >>> >>> ~Michael > > -- > Paulo Pires >
