This is done. --jason
On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 00:39, Jason Dillon wrote: > You are right. I had a momentary lapse of reason (that lasted for more > than a moment actually). > > I still think that we should find a better name for the j2ee module, but > there is only real motivation to do that if we move the jmx and other > apis in there too. > > My apologies for my lack of sensibility on this matter. I will have it > fixed shortly. > > --jason > > > On Sun, 2002-02-17 at 00:24, Scott M Stark wrote: > > All these name changes are basically just screwing around > > with semantic trivialities. Change these names back: > > > > mq -> messaging > > resource -> connector > > plastic -> j2ee > > > > and do not make any more name changes without discussing > > why it is necessary. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jason Dillon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Scott M Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 11:46 PM > > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] **README** - 'jboss-all' Structure > > Changes -**README** > > > > > > > On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 23:29, Scott M Stark wrote: > > > > > > > > > > o Renamed 'messaging' to 'mq'. I don't know what I was thinking > > before > > > > > when I used messaging. Sorry. > > > > > > > > > Messaging is a better name than mq. > > > > > > I figured the jbossmq folks would want something mq-like back. I > > > personally don't care too much... just had trouble typing messaging. > > > > > > > > o Renamed 'connector' to 'resource' for clarity. > > > > > > > > > Connector is more clearly associated with the JCA than resource. > > > > Leave this as connector. > > > > > > JCA uses javax.resource.* for its packaging. They really should have > > > called it JRCA, since it is for connecting resources. > > > > > > If you don't mind I would like to keep it as resource, as it makes it > > > more logically to house standard adapters there. > > > > > > Basically its just a name, so I don't care too much. I only made these > > > changes because I thought that the current names were poor for what > > > types of bits live in them. > > > > > > > > o Renamed 'j2ee' to 'plastic' for clarity and to keep folks from > > > > > thinking that is a j2ee impl. It is just a module to hold our own > > > > > imitation/synthetic/copy/plastic versions of Sun's API's > > > > > > > > > What has plastic to do with standard j2ee interfaces? These are > > > > getting to be riduculous name changes so knock it off and change > > > > plastic back to j2ee. > > > > > > I figured someone was going to say something about this. I had noticed > > > that we are now providing JMX interfaces in a similar style to the j2ee > > > interfaces. Perhaps we will do the same in the future as well. So in > > > comes plastic, which is a module which only serves to hold these > > > implementations. > > > > > > Perhaps I had picked up a little bit of an urge to have some spiffy > > > macosx-like names from looking over the apple website lately. > > > > > > If you feel strongly about reverting I will. > > > > > > --jason > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Jboss-development mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
