I'm glad I'm not alone. I've asked the question to a wider audience to see if they'd get the reference:
http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t98469.html On 07/07/07, Remy Chi Jian Suen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You're not alone, Alex. I think ip is a horrible name. initprovisioning or initprov or something would've been better. There's just no way that someone's going to know that 'ip' is 'initial provisioning'. Regards, Rem On 7/7/07, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am I really the only one who thinks '.ip' is a bad name? > > Alex. > > On 07/07/07, Simon Kaegi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's great! I've just done a quick sanity check and everything compiles, > > starts and is ready to try out. > > Thanks. > > > > For anyone wanting to take a look, the following new projects were added to > > the incubator. > > > > 1) org.eclipse.equinox.ds > > 2) org.eclipse.equinox.io > > 3) org.eclipse.equinox.ip > > 4) org.eclipse.equinox.util > > 5) org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin > > > > I had one cosmetic question for equinox.util. Currently the BSN is > > "org.eclipse.equinox.util.putifull" -- is there some reason it's not just > > org.eclipse.equinox.util? > > -Simon > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/07/2007 06:41:23 AM: > > > > > In CVS under your proposed naming. > > > > > > -Pavlin > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, I'm not particular about the names right now. Since we already > > > have a DS bundle lets just use org.eclipse.equinox.ds for > > > declarative services. > > > > > > I also like org.eclipse.equinox.ip for initial provisioning but > > > thought it might be to short :) but it is snappy. > > > > > > Pavlin, if these are ok with you please release with the names org. > > > eclipse.equinox.ds and org.eclipse.equinox.ip. As I said before it > > > is no big deal to rename the bundles if needed in the incubator later. > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > Chris Aniszczyk/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > 07/05/2007 09:34 PM > > > > > > Please respond to > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@eclipse.org> > > > > > > To > > > > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@eclipse.org> > > > > > > cc > > > > > > Subject > > > > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions > > > > > > as an outsider, +1 for DS instead of SCR, there's like 5 people that > > > would get the SCR reference :) > > > > > > initialprovisioning is really long.... > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > --- > > > Chris Aniszczyk | IBM Lotus | Eclipse Committer | http://mea-bloga. > > > blogspot.com | +1.860.839.2465 > > > > > > [image removed] Jeff McAffer ---07/05/2007 09:13:02 PM---I agree > > > with all/most Tom said. In the end we should look to have just one > > > DS implementation, Ultimately I suggest that it be > > > > > > [image removed] > > > From: > > > > > > [image removed] > > > Jeff McAffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > [image removed] > > > To: > > > > > > [image removed] > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@eclipse.org> > > > > > > [image removed] > > > Date: > > > > > > [image removed] > > > 07/05/2007 09:13 PM > > > > > > [image removed] > > > Subject: > > > > > > [image removed] > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions > > > > > > I agree with all/most Tom said. In the end we should look to have > > > just one DS implementation, Ultimately I suggest that it be called > > > o.e.e.ds. Never did like "scr". I'm a little bummed by o.e.e. > > > initialprovisioning. o.e.e.ip is snappier and I doubt that anyone > > > would get confused with Intelectual property, or Internet Protocol > > > or, ... In any event, it is a mild dislike so... > > > > > > Lets get the code in the incubator and move forward. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > Thomas Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > 07/05/2007 03:51 PM > > > > > > Please respond to > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@eclipse.org> > > > > > > To > > > > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@eclipse.org> > > > > > > cc > > > > > > [image removed] > > > > > > Subject > > > > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions > > > > > > [image removed] > > > > > > [image removed] > > > > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > > > I can commit the sources in the CVS. Here are the open issues > > > > that should be resolved prior moving code to the CVS. > > > > > > > > 1. Naming. > > > > Following the discussion the last proposed naming is: > > > > 1.1 org.eclipse.equionx.initialprovisioning > > > > other suggestion: org.eclipse.equionx.ip > > > > > > +1 for org.eclipse.equinox.initialprovisioning > > > > > > I think this name will reduce an confusion with the > > > rest of the equinox provisioning work. > > > > > > > 1.2 org.eclipse.equionx.ds > > > > other suggestion: org.eclipse.equionx.scr > > > > > > +1 for org.eclipse.equinox.scr > > > > > > > 1.3 org.eclipse.equinox.io > > > > 1.4 org.eclipse.equinox.util > > > > 1.5 org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin > > > > > > > > 2. Replacing. If we use the names org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin and > > > > org.eclipse.equionx.ds they collide with the current one. Can we > > replace > > > > the code in the CVS at this stage directly or temporary other names > > > > will be used? > > > > > > There is no problem replacing the current implementations in the > > > incubator. To be clear this is under the equinox-incubator directory > > > at dev.eclipse.org:/cvsroot/eclipse. At this point I suggest we > > > get the initial code released in the incubator. It is likely that > > > a number of refactorings are going be needed to follow other > > > eclipse coding practices (i.e. using "internal" package names etc.). > > > > > > I'm not fussed on getting all the names correct initially. We > > > can easily rename them if needed in the incubator. > > > > > > > > > > > 3. javax.microedition.io package > > > > Now it is in Connector services implementation. This is not a good > > > > choice because it is needed only on Java SE VMs. J2ME VMs > > > > contains that package. In our equinox distribution it is a fragment of > > > > the system bundle that is installed only on Java SE VMs. > > > > But initially we can put it inside the connector implementation. > > > > > > > > -Pavlin > > > > > > > > > > I think we should consider separating this out into another bundle and > > > import the packages from org.eclipse.equinox.io (but we can do this > > later). > > > I'm not sure why it has to be a system bundle fragment. I think we > > should > > > make it a normal bundle (called javax.microedition.io?). > > > > > > Tom _______________________________________________ > > > equinox-dev mailing list > > > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > > > equinox-dev mailing list > > > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > > > equinox-dev mailing list > > > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > equinox-dev mailing list > > > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > equinox-dev mailing list > > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > equinox-dev mailing list > equinox-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev > _______________________________________________ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________ equinox-dev mailing list equinox-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev