Understood.
Thanks for the update.
Regards
JB
On 12/15/2017 04:34 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
Change the package name could cause some trouble for the user to update
their code.
As we are using the vender neutral package name already, it could save us
time to still use the io.servicecomb, but I t
Change the package name could cause some trouble for the user to update
their code.
As we are using the vender neutral package name already, it could save us
time to still use the io.servicecomb, but I think it should be OK we can
update the groupid to org.apache.servicecomb.
Willem Jiang
Blog:
Any blocking point to use org.apache.servicecomb ?
That would be better.
Regards
JB
On 12/15/2017 12:04 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
I just cleaned up the License header of the java-chassis and saga projects.
Now Asif is working on clean up the License header of service-center.
@JB current we want
Hi Bo,
It's a good feature to support user to change the configuration dynamically
from a configure server.
Please let us know your research result and made a proposal in the
community.
Willem Jiang
Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
http://jnn.iteye.com (Chinese)
Twitt
I just cleaned up the License header of the java-chassis and saga projects.
Now Asif is working on clean up the License header of service-center.
@JB current we want to keep using "io.servicecomb" as the package name
prefix.
Please let me know if there is any thing we need to change.
Willem J
