geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Dillon" <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: Commit configId to moduleId?
Date Sat, 06 May 2006 00:02:03 GMT
I would say commit it, and if there are any major problems with the
tck, then we back out, otherwise I would rather us fix it for the tck
to pass and keep the change to use moduleId in 1.1.

--jason


On 5/5/06, David Blevins <david.blevins@visi.com> wrote:
> On May 5, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> > I'll defer to the body of committers as to how important this is
> > and if it should go into for 1.1. Personally I don't think it
> > really matters what the name is.  ModuleId has its own set of
> > baggage and so will everything else.  I'm more concerned about
> > another disruptive change to the users which will eventually
> > require them to change their plans.  Even if we decide to provide a
> > conversion utility to bridge the gap for now we'll eventually
> > deprecate it and force them to change.
> >
> > My personal opinion is -0 and weould prefer to leave it alone.
> >
>
> We've already had a vote to change it, so the question is when.  If
> Dain is willing to back out the change immediately if it doesn't look
> good in the tck, then I'm fine with it now.
>
> My $0.02
>
> -David
>
>
> > Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> >> I think now is the time to discuss if we want to commit the change
> >> from configId to moduleId.  If we decide to commit the patch, the
> >> timing of the actual commit will be determined by Kevan to have
> >> the smallest impact on the TCK.  The patch makes the following
> >> changes:
> >>   o Renamed root element from "configuration" to "module"
> >>   o Renamed environment element from "configId" to "moduleId"
> >>   o Renamed schema from "geronimo-config-1.1.xsd" to "geronimo-
> >> module-1.1.xsd"
> >> Based on conversations over the past few days, I think we all
> >> agree that "configuration" is a poor name choice, and we want to
> >> change it.  I also think that we all agree that if we are going to
> >> make the change we should change the xml schemas before 1.1 ships
> >> to have minimal impact on users (we already have schema changes
> >> going into 1.1).
> >> Should we commit?
> >> -dain
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message