<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Jason Lee <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jason@steeplesoft.com">jason@steeplesoftcom</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"><div class="im">
On 2/1/10 9:13 AM, Kito Mann wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">There was a discussion about nested resource library names
last year. I would say to search the archives, but I don't know if
that's possible. Anyway, here was the outcome:<br>
<br>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Ed:<br>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Yes,
you are correct that the <span>resource</span> naming
scheme prevents <span>nested</span><br>
<span>resource</span> libraries. <span>Nested</span>
<span>resource</span> libraries were not on the list of<br>
requirements when we designed this feature back in November of 2007. We<br>
will not accept this requirement change at this point.</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
Dan:<br>
<br>
So
the spec needs to at least be clear that it's not permitted and suggest
the alternative. Several people reading it didn't understand what to do
in this case.<br>
<br>
IMHO, it's a shame that we can't use the <span>nested</span>
structure. Seems like a pretty obvious convention instead of
configuration thing. I don't know how that got missed in the design
process.<br>
</blockquote></div>
It would be interesting to find out why that was left out. Was it
simply an oversight, or are there technical reasons for disallowing
that? On the surface, it sounds like it would be easy to implement and
support, but I've not thought too deeply on the topic. Maybe that's
something we should fix, if we can, for 2.1.<br></div></blockquote><div><br>We never got to the bottom of why this was left out, but I think there was a general agreement that it should be fixed. Let's discuss when and get an issue report filed.<br>
<br>Here is the (not-so-pretty) link to the original discussion:<br><br><a href="http://archives.java.sun.com/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0904&L=JSR-314-OPEN&X=3E023C7A0F922F9C1F#16">http://archives.java.sun.com/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0904&L=JSR-314-OPEN&X=3E023C7A0F922F9C1F#16</a><br>
<br>(that reminds me I have some leaning on the JCP PMO to get to).<br><br>-Dan<br clear="all"></div></div><br>-- <br>Dan Allen<br>Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action<br>Registered Linux User #231597<br>
<br><a href="http://mojavelinux.com">http://mojavelinux.com</a><br><a href="http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction">http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction</a><br><a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen">http://wwwgoogle.com/profiles/dan.j.allen</a><br>