+1 for dropping
2013/3/31 Cody Lerum <cody.le...@gmail.com> > drop em. > > > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > > yes, let's drop them. annotations are like interfaces nowadays. So this > is > > just superfluous. > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> > > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > Cc: > > > Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 5:30 PM > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] re-visit "annotation" package/s > > > > > > hi @ all, > > > > > > we had an agreement to use a (sub-)package named "annotation" for all > > > our > > > annotations within a package. > > > however, it feels a bit clumsy if a package (currently) just contains > > > annotations. > > > e.g. org.apache.deltaspike.core.api.exclude only contains the package > > > "annotation". > > > > > > currently we have a mixture (some parts are using the "annotation" > > > package > > > and some don't) > > > -> we have to align it the one way or the other. > > > i'm currently in favour of dropping the "annotation"-package/s. > > > > > > regards, > > > gerhard > > > > > > -- Christian Kaltepoth Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal GitHub: https://github.com/chkal
