Whether "classic" has a bad flair or not, it is much closer to real state of things, than Struts Core, which is not actually a core. Using a fancier name (from the point of view of some marketing-affected people) instead of cleaner and true name does not make much sense to me. Neither as 2 calories' green salad with thick cheesy dressing and oily breadsticks.
On 11/2/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I for one would have no objection to dating. That's a good compromise. > I still think a version number would be better, but a date I could > certainly live with. > > The naming I still would contend is confusing though. > > Why wouldn't there simply be a distro called Struts that includes Core > (which happens to map to the core subproject) and the original seven > subprojects, plus the three new ones if you want? That to me makes a > lot more sense. I would even argue that the new three should NOT be > part of the distro and should instead remain extensions, but I'm less > concerned with that than what I think is a bit of a confusing name. > > Come on, we got rid of Classic, a move I definitely agree with, let's go > this next step :-) > > Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
