What artifact id should the blueprint-parser bundle have?

[Holly Cummins <ho...@googlemail.com>]

Hi all,

As I was preparing the most recent batch of bundle releases, I noticed
that the artifact id for blueprint-parser doesn't follow the same
pattern as the rest of our artifact
 ids - it's "blueprint-parser" rather than
"org.apache.aries.blueprint.parser". I know we discussed the group id
of the util bundle recently and decided that consistency with previous
releases was more important than consistency with other bundles, but
the blueprint-parser id seems *really* inconsistent. I suspect users
would be pretty confused by the fact that the artifact id isn't the
same as the bundle symbolic name.

What do people think? Should we correct it before 1.0.0, or leave it as it is?

Holly

Re: What artifact id should the blueprint-parser bundle have?

[Holly Cummins <ho...@googlemail.com>]

Ah yes, you're right! Thanks, Jeremy. I guess in that case the id is  
much less critical, and in fact being different from our usual pattern  
is arguably a good thing.

On 14 Jul 2012, at 11:52, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:

> I thought blueprint-parser was just shaded into other bundle  
> projects and
> wasn't a bundle itself.
> On Jul 14, 2012 11:24 AM, "Holly Cummins" <holly.k.cummins@googlemail.com 
> >
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As I was preparing the most recent batch of bundle releases, I  
>> noticed
>> that the artifact id for blueprint-parser doesn't follow the same
>> pattern as the rest of our artifact
>> ids - it's "blueprint-parser" rather than
>> "org.apache.aries.blueprint.parser". I know we discussed the group id
>> of the util bundle recently and decided that consistency with  
>> previous
>> releases was more important than consistency with other bundles, but
>> the blueprint-parser id seems *really* inconsistent. I suspect users
>> would be pretty confused by the fact that the artifact id isn't the
>> same as the bundle symbolic name.
>>
>> What do people think? Should we correct it before 1.0.0, or leave  
>> it as it
>> is?
>>
>> Holly
>>

Re: What artifact id should the blueprint-parser bundle have?

[Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>]

I thought blueprint-parser was just shaded into other bundle projects and
wasn't a bundle itself.
On Jul 14, 2012 11:24 AM, "Holly Cummins" <ho...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As I was preparing the most recent batch of bundle releases, I noticed
> that the artifact id for blueprint-parser doesn't follow the same
> pattern as the rest of our artifact
>  ids - it's "blueprint-parser" rather than
> "org.apache.aries.blueprint.parser". I know we discussed the group id
> of the util bundle recently and decided that consistency with previous
> releases was more important than consistency with other bundles, but
> the blueprint-parser id seems *really* inconsistent. I suspect users
> would be pretty confused by the fact that the artifact id isn't the
> same as the bundle symbolic name.
>
> What do people think? Should we correct it before 1.0.0, or leave it as it
> is?
>
> Holly
>