Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.46.155 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=qYelk0H3ZAsfGnwMvChrp2Vpm0ugjm7ccHEZNNAGCedHWHi7QtOfSjXDzLh344s9EA
         bsoSxmpnbvgeUtY21ahsj00lDwOG6N9VZeJX0Y1IC63QNN6d70iZTf2OpX7/desfcXGv
         nx6El9PBYr8LjXHUm7Oz4Ro3+YNj5AD8hRgwc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <016B2C6D-03AF-4A70-B18D-0F6CD5953659@SUN.com>
References: <016B2C6D-03AF-4A70-B18D-0F6CD5953659@SUN.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:03:53 +0200
Message-ID: <e75283b10904181303w6b685156n33c534a5ca3f630a@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library
From: Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: dev@commons.apache.org, sanselan-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi, Craig,

I'm personally not sure that commons would be the best fit for
Sanselan. Despite the name, I'd consider the commons of xmlgraphics
(despite the name, this is not only about XML) a better place.
Nevertheless, I'd vote in favour of Sanselan, if it comes to that.


On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:

> 1. It appears that dev@commons is the general mailing list for all commons
> projects. Would a small project like sanselan get lost in the traffic?

That's a problem that every part of Commons has. And another reason,
why you could possibly prefer the above place: No doubt, commons-dev
is relatively high volume. I am not sure, whether the shared mailing
list is the best solution, but I wouldn't like to have that discussion
in this context. As already said, it applies to every part and isn't
specific to Sanselan.


> 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?

IMO, no. I am unaware of an existing example without the commons
prefix, but what gives.


> 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)?

Definitely no. I am not even sure, whether there is *any* existing
part of commons with the org.apache.commons prefix. OTOH, I am quite
sure that there are lots of examples without.


Jochen


-- 
I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my
telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out
how to use my telephone.

    -- (Bjarne Stroustrup,
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#really-say-that
       My guess: Nokia E50)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org