Looks like .mdl is already taken.
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/online/formats/mdl/
+1 for ,mod
Thanks
Anita
--- Sachin Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1
>
> - sachin
>
>
>
> On May 6, 2006, at 3:24 AM, John Sisson wrote:
>
> > I also was just about to suggest a .module extension, but after
> > further thought, having an extension longer than three characters
> > is likely to reintroduce the filename length issues (under
geronimo
>
> > \repository) on Windows during the builds.
> >
> > How about .mod or .mdl.
> >
> > John
> >
> > Jason Dillon wrote:
> >> I'd be happy if we never ended up calling any file a .[a-zA-Z]
ar.
>
> >> I think that the ear/war/rar thing is lame to start with, the
> >> folks that continue to use the same lame extension naming system
> >> (sar, har, dar, car) just perpetuate this silly system that Sun
> >> dropped on us.
> >>
> >> If we need to use extensions to clarify what something is, then
> >> lets use something more sensible. Like for a module, why not
just
>
> >> use .module? If you want to still say its a jar,
> >> then .module.jar, but please lets not make it a .mar.
> >>
> >> --jason
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 5, 2006, at 7:40 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sounds like the consensus is to change it (although I don't
> >>> remember a formal vote although I do remember the discussion).
> >>> For my part it sounds like we're changing the configId to
> >>> moduleId to decrease confusion. It seems odd that the modules
> >>> are called CARs (Configuration Archives) or some such thing. I
> >>> think we're making the server more confusing because now less
> >>> things actually line up from a naming perspective.
> >>>
> >>> It just doesn't feel like we're giving our users a lot of
> stability.
> >>>
> >>> As David said, Just my $0.02.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to see more input from people though. I've been
> >>> travelling so I must have missed the vote to put it in.
> >>>
> >>> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> >>>> I think now is the time to discuss if we want to commit the
> >>>> change from configId to moduleId. If we decide to commit the
> >>>> patch, the timing of the actual commit will be determined by
> >>>> Kevan to have the smallest impact on the TCK. The patch makes
> >>>> the following changes:
> >>>> o Renamed root element from "configuration" to "module"
> >>>> o Renamed environment element from "configId" to "moduleId"
> >>>> o Renamed schema from "geronimo-config-1.1.xsd" to
"geronimo-
> >>>> module-1.1.xsd"
> >>>> Based on conversations over the past few days, I think we all
> >>>> agree that "configuration" is a poor name choice, and we
want to
>
> >>>> change it. I also think that we all agree that if we are
going
>
> >>>> to make the change we should change the xml schemas before 1.1
> >>>> ships to have minimal impact on users (we already have schema
> >>>> changes going into 1.1).
> >>>> Should we commit?
> >>>> -dain
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com