On Nov 24, 2010, at 7:36 AM, James Carman wrote: > We've had this package name/artifactId change discussion numerous > times and I think it's time we put this thing to a vote. What I > propose is that we say that this is a rule and in order to "break" > that rule, you have to provide strong evidence that the component's > situation is unique and not affected by the issues that this rule > tries to address. This is to avoid re-hashing this argument all the > time. If a component wants to break the rule, then they should think > through the arguments (read the Wiki page first) and carefully > consider why they feel they are unique and unaffected by the issues. > So, here's the rule: > > A major version change requires that you change the package name (the > part that comes after org.apache.commons) and the Maven artifactId to > the component's name with the major version appended to the end. > > [ ] +1 - accept this as a rule > [ ] -1 - do not accept this as a rule >
-1 for the same reasons stated by Stephen and sebb. If this was changed to be based on binary compatibility breakage I would vote +1. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
