Mailing-List: contact dev-help@zest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@zest.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: hedhman@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <559A4648.9060208@nosphere.org>
References: 
 <CADmm+KfaemjVm5BM+O=PpCetiXkLfHdrL1BQErWBS03mSB_-nQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559A42D5.3020200@nosphere.org>
 <CADmm+Kd8FYaZibnwFnyWu7yzfeMmQQrmudLaW6GtK6dYgdoMoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559A4648.9060208@nosphere.org>
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 12:20:31 +0300
Message-ID: 
 <CADmm+Kf-=s9JOTrvxsKvYPaq+8k+23MV_OjG=cttyPMY9Tvixw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Project Name
To: dev <dev@zest.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ef45a0033bf051a316c48

--001a113ef45a0033bf051a316c48
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am Ok with that...

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Paul Merlin <paul@nosphere.org> wrote:

> Niclas Hedhman a =C3=A9crit :
> > I think we should do it before. That sends a clearer message to people
> who
> > isn't heavily involved.
> > But, on second thought, that would bring up the issue about Java packag=
e
> > names...
>
> So, could we rename everything BUT java packages for 2.1?
> Then, what if we explain this in the release notes and in the
> documentation?
>
> Something along the lines of:
>
> "Apache Zest Java Edition 2.1 is the first release of the Qi4j codebase
> under the Apache Software Foundation umbrella. To keep backward
> compatiblity, this version still use org.qi4j.* java packages. Please
> note that this will change in 3.0."
>
>


--=20
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java

--001a113ef45a0033bf051a316c48--