On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 3:45 AM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2. Most commons components have a "functional" name instead of a "fun" name.
> Would Sanselan need to be renamed, e.g. Commons Image, or would it be ok to
> have the sub-project called Sanselan, or Commons Sanselan?
What for? It would bring only confusion and additional work. Let's spare that.
> 3. Would any changes be required from the existing packaging of Sanselan?
> For example, packages are named org.apache.sanselan. Would these need to be
> renamed to org.apache.commons.sanselan (or less fun name as above)?
This is the case for most of commons components. No sense in treating
Sanselan otherwise.
Jochen
--
Don't trust a government that doesn't trust you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
|