Bjorn et al., I was thinking more about the branding of this new component, and since I've been having a similar conversation with my GSoC student, Michael Robb, about his work to create wizards for generating project meta (eg., examples feature/plugin stub, tests feature/plugin stub, SDK feature stub, and .releng project) [1], it seems like his work ought to live in Dash too, rather than in o.e.soc as this is entirely complementary to the work involved in a common builder.
We had discussed calling his component Athena [2] in reference to her creation story (and the idea of projects "springing forth, fully formed"), but hadn't fully decided on "athena" vs. "metagen". I like the name and its evocative branding, so I'd like to put it to the larger Dash committer community. Should "metagen", currently a GSoC project [1], and the new "commonbuilder" be united under the org.eclipse.dash.athena or org.eclipse.athena namespace? (Michael, this would mean moving your code from the SOC cvs repo to Dash one, and using o.e.(dash.)athena.metagen.* for your code. We'd also have to vote you in as a committer, but that's trivial.) [1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/JET_Transforms/Wizards_for_creating_project_meta_data [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena#The_Olympian_version Thoughts? Nick On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:05 PM, portal on behalf of Bjorn Freeman-Benson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > technology.dash.commonbuild Committers,
_______________________________________________ dash-dev mailing list dash-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dash-dev
