On 9/13/07, Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/12/07, Tim McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Start of discussion thread..... > > Hi Tim, > > I'm pretty sure I asked about it (or was about to have asked, but > failed), but why is the plugin called g-eclipse-plugin? Wouldn't it be > better off if it called geronimo-eclipse-plugin? It doesn't say much > when I have g-eclipse-plugin in my eclipse plugin repository and in > discussions people tend to use geronimo-eclipse-plugin even though it > may seem to be easier to say g-eclipse-plugin and following the > plugin's name. It can be confusing. > > I think I should've noted it sooner and I do appologize to talk about > it now right before the plugin is to be released and am leaning > towards -1 because of the name (I don't want to be disruptive to the > process, so just a friendly reminder I should not do that do the trick > just fine ;-))
Agree with Jacek about changing the name from "g-eclipse-plugin-*" to "geronimo-eclipse-plugin-*". There will then be consistency in what we have and what we speak. Jacek, Will it be fine if we do this in the next release 2.1? We probably can have a JIRA opened for this so that we don't loose track of this. Getting 2.0 out will allow us to focus back on trunk, in which we want to propose some major changes to Geronimo deployment plan editors. - Shiva Jacek > > -- > Jacek Laskowski > http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl >
