Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-camel-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 97464 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2011 11:36:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Feb 2011 11:36:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 72535 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2011 11:36:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-dev-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 72468 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2011 11:36:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 72460 invoked by uid 99); 6 Feb 2011 11:36:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:36:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (nike.apache.org: transitioning domain of cschneider@talend.com does not designate 62.75.158.78 as permitted sender) Received: from [62.75.158.78] (HELO mail.liquid-reality.de) (62.75.158.78) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:36:20 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.102] (HSI-KBW-091-089-013-105.hsi2.kabelbw.de [91.89.13.105]) by mail.liquid-reality.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F0CB38002 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2011 11:36:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4D4E879F.2010103@talend.com> Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 12:35:59 +0100 From: Christian Schneider User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dev@camel.apache.org" Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] The future of camel-extra References: <6557C49D-2066-4DF6-AEA3-B0CCDF9054A5@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6557C49D-2066-4DF6-AEA3-B0CCDF9054A5@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I give +1 for option #2 as we are then more independent of google Christian Am 05.02.2011 23:29, schrieb Hadrian Zbarcea: > Now that 2.6.0 is out, I planned to give camel-extra a bit more attention. > > There are some changes we need to make to camel-extra and I raised an issue about it a while ago and added one more comment: > http://code.google.com/p/camel-extra/issues/detail?id=22 > > {quote} > The camel-extra project is an independent project, not affiliated with the ASF. As such it is not managed by the Camel PMC, but by individuals who are heavily involved with Camel and some are on the Camel PMC. The camel-extra project misuses org.apache.camel as a package name and that should be changed asap. That said, the ASF started no long ago "apache extras" [1] to accelerate innovation on code associated with ASF projects, which is still at google code. > > I see two options: > 1. We keep camel-extra here, we change the groupId and package to something like com.googlecode.camel.extra. > 2. We move the project to apache extras and change the groupId and package to org.apachextras.camel [2] > > Thoughts? > > [1] http://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_launches > [2] http://www.whois.net/whois/apachextras.org > {quote} > > I would prefer option #2. This will also help with issue #21 and allow us to publish the artifacts in the central maven repo. > > Hadrian -- Christian Schneider CXF and Camel Architect SOPERA - The Application Integration Division of Talend http://www.talend.com