geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Other MP Specs @ Geronimo?
Date Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:35:38 GMT
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 7:59 PM David Blevins <david.blevins@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > On Sep 4, 2017, at 4:56 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > So I want to pick back up at least with fault tolerance.  Would anyone
> be opposed to starting up a repo on it?  I'm thinking of the name
> "Safeguard" so that it would either be "org.apache.safeguard" or
> "org.apache.geronimo.safeguard" as group id in maven (xbean uses the
> former, config the latter).
>
> I have a strong preference for “org.apache.safeguard" over
> “org.apache.geronimo.safeguard”.  We have 14 years of Google search results
> to work against and a few million developers brains that say Geronimo is an
> app server.  Every time we put “Geronimo” on something, it’s a strike
> against Hammok, Meecrowave and TomEE and any MP implementation that may
> want to use it but not confuse the world that “Geronimo is back".
>

My preference is to keep "org.apache.safeguard" as well.  I've created the
base skeleton with "org.apache.geronimo.safeguard" but not sure it'll
stay.  Would be good to get a solid response on naming recommendations, so
we'll see.  Most other sub-projects just use their own name.


>
> If we do want a parent package, I repeat we can use org.apache.xbean if we
> like.  It was meant for common reusable stuff.  We do not need to shackle
> ourselves with any self-imposed restrictions like “xbean needs to be all
> released at once”.  That was only done out of laziness.
>
>
The reason I'm hesitant to look at XBean, it seems to be focused on a
single target (which is good for a sub-project).  It would start to confuse
things to make more stuff XBean.  Plus its a kind of odd name, I'm guessing
the X is for XML.


>
> -David
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message