if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau http://www.tomitribe.com http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com https://github.com/rmannibucau 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm. > > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aalmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 on "annotation" >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray >> -- >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator. >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and >> those who don't. >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion. >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) >> you'll >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc. >> > >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation" >> , >> > too. >> > >> > Anybody against that?;-) >> > >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that. >> > >> > Werner >> > >>
