Oliver Lietz wrote
> On Thursday 13 October 2016 20:36:10 Stefan Seifert wrote:
>>> Do we really want org.apache.sling.contextaware.config as package name?
>>> Sling Content Distribution uses org.apache.sling.distribution, so
>>> org.apache.sling.configuration for Sling's context-ware
On Thursday 13 October 2016 20:36:10 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> >Do we really want org.apache.sling.contextaware.config as package name?
> >Sling Content Distribution uses org.apache.sling.distribution, so
> >org.apache.sling.configuration for Sling's context-ware configuration
> >should be fine, no?
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> ...only "configuration" is misleading, because it's not about osgi
> configuration, but only
> about context-aware configuration. thus "contextaware" has to be part of the
> package name...
I agree that just
>Do we really want org.apache.sling.contextaware.config as package name?
>Sling Content Distribution uses org.apache.sling.distribution, so
>org.apache.sling.configuration for Sling's context-ware configuration
>should be fine, no?
only "configuration" is misleading, because it's not about osgi
On Tuesday 11 October 2016 21:51:19 Stefan Seifert wrote:
> we've reached a quite good featureset in the current implementation of the
> context-ware configuration [1].
>
> to make it usable by projects it would be useful to make a release soon.
>
> there are some planned extensions missing, but
+1 for a release
Stefan Seifert wrote
> we've reached a quite good featureset in the current implementation of the
> context-ware configuration [1].
>
> to make it usable by projects it would be useful to make a release soon.
>
> there are some planned extensions missing, but i've moved them
we've reached a quite good featureset in the current implementation of the
context-ware configuration [1].
to make it usable by projects it would be useful to make a release soon.
there are some planned extensions missing, but i've moved them to version 1.1.0
because i think they are not