From: "Rob Oxspring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Is there any reason why both full words couldn't be used? I'm imagining a > component called collections-primitive that involves no repackaging. I > guess it might clash with a future primitives subpackage of collections > but that's surely not on the cards is it? > > > Are you happy for the package to be pcollections? > > Can't remember if its in any charter or not but my thinking is that the > package should always match the compontent name. When the jar name also > follows suit and maintanence is so much easier for the end user.
Possible, but I think probably more confusing in the long term. It seems worth taking a package rename now for the greater clarity. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
