My take is deprecate the old package names (org.tigris.*), add the new package name (org.apache.subversion.*), and remove the deprecated names whenever we go to 2.0.
I'm moderately ambivalent on whether this happens for 1.7 or if can wait for 1.8... I don't see much else we can do under our versioning policies. -- justin On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > See below... > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 17:32 > Subject: Re: Discussion: graduating Subversion > To: gene...@incubator.apache.org > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 17:21, Craig L Russell <craig.russ...@sun.com> wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> On Jan 25, 2010, at 12:49 PM, Greg Stein wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Before calling for a vote to graduate Subversion, I figured it prudent >>> to have a discussion first. I believe Subversion is quite ready (and >>> has been, but the holidays and whatnot kept me from sending this >>> earlier). >>> >>> Any thoughts on why Subversion should NOT graduate now? >> >> As I've said earlier, I'd like to know how you plan to resolve the question >> of in which package you propose to ship the Java components. IIUC, you use >> org.tigris in the distributions to date. > > I don't think we have a specific plan for that yet, and I know we were > looking for "Apache Best Practices" on that, but not sure if we found > any there. > > I'll bring that back to the dev list. > > Cheers, > -g >
