netty all-in-one review/cleanup

[carrot-garden]

netty all-in-one review/cleanup after #870 #1010

• rename netty-parent -> netty and netty -> netty-bundle or netty-all?
• make all-in-one non osgi bundle?
• keep all-in-one as osgi bundle?
• remove all-in-one completely?

[trustin]

• I don't think we need to rename artifactIds.
• +1 for making all-in-one non-OSGi
• I'd like to keep all-in-one. Single JAR dependency is often useful for a beginner.

[carrot-garden]

-1: current project/module naming can be confusing for a beginner.

[trustin]

We've been using the artifactId netty for all-in-one JAR since 3. I'm not sure we have to change that now.

[normanmaurer]

I agree with @trustin . I see no reason for a change

[dantran]

perhaps it is a good time to change it since netty 4 is a huge refactoring comparing to netty-3 anyway. Name it as netty-all looks much more obvious.

[jestan]

may be netty-all.jar -> netty-uber.jar ?

[trustin]

Renaming netty to netty-something sounds good to me. (I'd stick to netty-parent though.) Here are the names I thought about:

• netty-all.jar
• netty-uber.jar
• netty-all-in-one.jar
• netty-all_in_one.jar (because we use '-' like a file separator for module names)
• netty-☠.jar (Just kidding)

I'm leaning toward netty-all-in-one.jar. Any objections?

[dantran]

netty-all.jar, i have seen other package do that convention. netty-all-in-on.jar looks long :-)

[normanmaurer]

I also vote for netty-all.jar

[trustin]

Renamed to netty-all.jar.

[normanmaurer]

@trustin can we close this ?

[carrot-garden]

+1 rename netty-parent -> netty :-)

[normanmaurer]

after talking with @trustin we thing we are good here.. Closing it

[carrot-garden]

this feels like a hack

    <!-- The example depends on (almost) all modules either directly or transitively -->
    <dependency>
      <groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
      <artifactId>netty-example</artifactId>
      <version>${project.version}</version>
      <scope>compile</scope>
      <optional>true</optional>
    </dependency>

I would rather have all modules listed explicitly

[normanmaurer]

Agree

Sent from my iPhone. Excuse any typos....

Am 10.02.2013 um 16:02 schrieb Andrei Pozolotin notifications@github.com:

this feels like a hack

<!-- The example depends on (almost) all modules either directly or transitively -->
<dependency>
  <groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
  <artifactId>netty-example</artifactId>
  <version>${project.version}</version>
  <scope>compile</scope>
  <optional>true</optional>
</dependency>

I would rather have all modules listed explicitly

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub..