geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r483201 [1/2] - in /geronimo/server/trunk: applications/console/geronimo-console-framework/ applications/console/geronimo-console-standard/ applications/demo/ applications/geronimo-ca-helper/ applications/geronimo-examples/geronimo-jsp-exam...
Date Thu, 07 Dec 2006 15:57:15 GMT

On Dec 6, 2006, at 8:11 PM, David Jencks wrote:

> I'm not sure who I've talked to about this or where but I think  
> really really strongly that we should include the major version  
> number of the projects we integrate in our artifactIds relating to  
> those external projects.
>
> A couple people have pointed out that something like jetty_6 or  
> geronimo-jetty6-builder is more consistent with our spec naming  
> than jetty6 or geronimo-jetty6-naming.
> I don't really care about that, although I think the shorter  
> tomcat6 is perfectly clear and easier to type.
>
> Other stuff:
> axis >> axis1
> cxf >> cxf1
> openjpa >> openjpa1
>
> I think this will really reduce confusion about what is running in  
> a  server.
>
> So, I'd like the tomcat modules to be renamed geronimo-tomcat6,  
> geronimo-tomcat6-builder, tomcat6, tomcat6-deployer.
>
> Can we discuss and settle this soon?

Not sure I feel quite as strongly as you.. but I'm giving it a  
try... ;-)

So, any module written explicitly for an external project (i.e. non- 
Geronimo) would have the external project's major version number  
encoded in it's name? But not minor number?

So, activemq, wadi,  would be added to your above list? Heh. How  
about geronimo-jetty-clustering-wadi? ;-) geronimo-jetty5-clustering- 
wadi2?

--kevan

Mime
View raw message