On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 20:56:02 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <i...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I was not aware of such a convention and I can't say I agree with it. It >> just seems redundant and unnecessary, but I suppose we should wait for >> Magnus to respond. > > Just to clarify: I did not say the name needed to be long, just that many (if > not all) tools has used the convention of using the package name > `build.tools.<toolname>` and the class name `<ToolName>.java`. > > I think the new name sounds 👍 . Thanks. Yes, the long name was my doing. Sorry. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14787#discussion_r1553173105
