Richard S. Hall wrote: > Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to > put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really > make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here.
> > Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. > I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is > Apache Felix Karaf. > > Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of > course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we > can debate it. > Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
