commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] [math] top-level package name
Date Sat, 23 May 2009 15:50:50 GMT
James Carman a écrit :
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Phil Steitz <> wrote:
>> Of course, our way here is to come to agreement and it looks like we have
>> not done that in this case.  My original vote (+1) was partly for
>> consistency with the rest of commons and out of fear of "jar hell"
>> scenarios.  I was swayed by Niall's argument and reflection on use cases
>> that I am aware of.  I am sure Niall as well is open to enlightenment if
>> others can point to practical use cases (observed or likely) involving
>> [math] that demonstrate that the "pain-minimizing" alternative is to change
>> the package name.
> Didn't someone say that math already had a "jar hell" situation
> encountered by users?

I said that. In fact it was not an unsolvable case because the concerned
project has control on the intermediate dependency. The people in charge
were also against the package name change.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message