On 8/7/05, Craig Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Brett, > > I looked at ibiblio and found some "official-looking" jars checked in. It > seems that we might use javax.jdo as the group name for the jdo2.jar (this > is the official API) once JDO is official, and then use either > org.apache.jdo or org.apache.db.jdo as the group name for the rest of the > release.
Sounds good - it will the RI, right? That's what we've done with servlet/jsp api from Tomcat (I assume that's what you are referring to - please let me know if there are any other non-distributable "official-looking" JARs that our block list missed :) > If the group name is intended to reflect the actual root package name, then > org.apache.jdo would seem correct. If it's not, perhaps someone can offer > some pointers to where the discussion took place so I could understand it > better. This is a purely policy decision - I went with the project name in my original proposal (basically matching the subversion structure), but Jakarta Commons folks preferred to keep the shorter name that matched the package which makes sense. Especially given that jdo is unlikely to crop up as a different project outside of DB, org.apache.jdo sounds fine. Thanks! - Brett --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
