Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 29804 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2005 02:00:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Sep 2005 02:00:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 87411 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2005 02:00:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 87375 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2005 02:00:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 87361 invoked by uid 99); 6 Sep 2005 02:00:48 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:00:48 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [211.24.132.29] (HELO f1.bali.ac) (211.24.132.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:01:01 -0700 Received: from [192.168.88.129] ([203.114.48.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by f1.bali.ac (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j862Odq8015905 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 10:24:40 +0800 From: Niclas Hedhman Organization: Independent To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: Planning 2.2 [was: Re: [2.2] Using includes in the sitemap for components?] Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 10:00:41 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <431BE769.7000607@apache.org> <431C4913.2090209@nada.kth.se> <431C69C5.3090102@odoko.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <431C69C5.3090102@odoko.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200509061000.41221.niclas@hedhman.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Monday 05 September 2005 23:52, Upayavira wrote: > In R4 (or rather in Oscar 2.0Alpha) you can specify exports such as > o.a.c.transformation.*Generator. This would be enough for us to avoid > having to rename packages. However, it would likely lead to some complex > wildcard expressions, so I would propose that we ignore that > functionality and use unique package names per block, as per R3. There is also the concern of "sealed" Jars of the JVM that should be taken into consideration. IMHO, separation is a GoodThing and should be carried out instead of hanging on to bad habits. Cheers Niclas