Enrique Rodriguez wrote:
My naming suggestions assumed people cared about the distinction
between standard and non-standard bundles. And by standard and
non-standard/optional I was thinking relative to the R4 spec. We need
to make it clear to people who care about only implementing standards
which bundles are R4 and which are Apache. But, if doco is good
enough for that then a single 'bundles' folder makes sense. I don't
care strongly about whether there's a distinction or not, just that in
the case of having the distinction, the folder names should be
descriptive of what that distinction is. The ASF makes a similar
distinction by putting ASF projects in the Incubator vs. TLP and we'll
do something similar with the 'sandbox'.
Again, I'm fine with a single 'bundles' folder if that distinction
makes no sense.
It is not that the distinction makes no sense, because it does make
sense, I just think the distinction is not that important. If people
think that it is, that's fine with me, but I still don't think
'optional' works, since all bundles are optional. If we really want to
draw a distinction, we could use 'r4-bundles' and 'bundles' or the
original suggestion.
-> richard
