+1 to drop, I hate them. On 1 Apr 2013, at 10:06, Christian Kaltepoth <christ...@kaltepoth.de> wrote:
> +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
