Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0C68F9889 for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:00:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 60592 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2012 14:00:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 60457 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2012 14:00:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 60449 invoked by uid 99); 29 Feb 2012 14:00:35 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.175] (HELO mail-wi0-f175.google.com) (209.85.212.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:00:29 +0000 Received: by wibhq12 with SMTP id hq12so1721997wib.6 for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:00:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com designates 10.216.136.208 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.216.136.208; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com designates 10.216.136.208 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=bimargulies@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=bimargulies@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.216.136.208]) by 10.216.136.208 with SMTP id w58mr241214wei.29.1330524008248 (num_hops = 1); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:00:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=hqap24uL1L+3GK2JLbZRIyecawWCbOSBbADh1XUDXZY=; b=uPNlxZEMRx84ihxtSQtV/98+aGDeO8TRnlGQd8Er7C2Gk9b0psJ8M/MT3xhnvn38Z8 ZxUC+Knb9jIgUlE2n5223b+JSzOnOF/0frC6tgWlEVDCA7o6/NTjt1R74eVqgY1jKo0G Qm7WmXtYBnSPB1JW7VzlJNMj2qQvdlOG1A7EI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.136.208 with SMTP id w58mr196405wei.29.1330524008171; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:00:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.103.164 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:00:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:00:08 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Packages renaming and backward compatibility (was: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator) From: Benson Margulies To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I don't think it's a good question. I think that it is typical of the sort of hypothetical question which leads to heaps of scorn from Sam. I can imagine circumstances where it would make some sense, and some cases where it would be evidence of a serious problem in a TLP. The Foundation is supposed, I claim, to be about basic principles and common sense, not endless picayune legislation. It seems common-sensical that nearly any Java code created at the foundation would be in an org.apache package -- but there's no point to trying to chisel this into tablets as opposed to expecting people to understand the general principles we're about here. Leo, are you out there? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org