> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 10:30:17AM +0100, Leo Simons wrote: > > import > > > org.apache.avalon.cornerstone.blocks.masterstore.xml.XMLFilePersistent > > Reposi > > tory; > > > > is just one example of many rediculously long > > package names. > ... > > option 1 > > -------- > > apache.${avalon-sub-project-name}.${component}.* > ... > > option 2 > > -------- > > avalon.${avalon-sub-project-name}.${component}.* > ... > > either is fine with me. Turbine follows the first > > option, so maybe we should follow their lead. > > Do they? Looking in the jakarta-turbine-2 and > jakarta-turbine-3 modules, all I can see are org.apache.turbine.*
org.apache.turbine org.apache.maven org.apache.fulcrum (those are all turbine packages) I think Leo meant something like that: org.apache.excalibur.event.* org.apache.cornerstone.connectionmanager.* > > Seems like it would be a huge break with convention to drop > the 'org.apache' prefix. Can't we just have an Ant filter > expanding @o.a.a.c@ to org.apache.avalon.cornerstone? -1 NO! We are thinking about our users here. Mandating that the users not only use ant to build their systems, but that they have to use non-standard munging if they don't want a class name that is 80 characters long (the example he gave at the beginning of his message) is not really an option. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
