[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6101) Consistent naming of oak modules

["angela (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15974840#comment-15974840 ] 

angela edited comment on OAK-6101 at 4/19/17 2:59 PM:
------------------------------------------------------

[~edivad], would you be ok with the suggested renaming of {{oak-commons-run}} to {{oak-run-commons}}?


was (Author: anchela):
[~edivad], would you be ok with the suggested renaming of {{oak-commons-run}} to {{oak-run-commons}} as suggested by [~mduerig]?

> Consistent naming of oak modules
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-6101
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6101
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Task
>            Reporter: angela
>            Priority: Minor
>
> quoting mail from [~mduerig] on oak-dev list:
> {quote}
> Apart from renaming oak-commons-run to oak-run-commons there is:
> 1) oak-authentication-* instead of oak-auth-* as this would be inline
> with oak-authorization-*.
> 2) Also it is not obvious that oak-segment-tar and oak-store-spi are
> related. From that POC oak-segment-tar should be something like
> oak-store-segment.
> 3) Further oak-example and oak-exercise: the former already has sub
> modules. Maybe we can rename it to oak-getting-started (or similar) and
> move oak-exercise into the renamed one.
> I'm actually reluctant about 1) and 2) as renaming established modules
> have quite a ripple effect. As with 3) we already have sub-modules in
> one place we should probably start a discussion of switching to a
> hierarchical module structure. To address 1) and 2) once the main
> modularisation effort stabilised.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)