On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 23:34, Berin Loritsch wrote: > We currently have 30 Excalibur sub projects. Some of which are > associated: bzip2, zip. Those could theorhetically be put in the > same subproject (archive) with two jars produced out of it. > > Unfortunately, if we had 30 mideaval names for Excalibur, we would > have a real mess on our hands. Leo's point, which is valid, is > that having all mideaval names is more counter-intuitive than > having a name more directly linked to what the package represents. > I.e. the event based package is in a good name for it right now.
Thats fine if they are simple components. As soon as you get into multiple-package systems that are likely to have multiple implementations then you are in trouble. -- Cheers, Pete *------------------------------------------------------* | "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want | | to test a man's character, give him power." | | -Abraham Lincoln | *------------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
