Move to Pax stack?

[tonit]

Just a guess, how about pushing this to the Pax stack (rename git project org.ops4j.pax.peaberry) and general naming Pax Peaberry (or PP for short). WDYT?

[tonit]

Alternatively, to be discussed with Stuart maybe, rename it to Pax DI, Pax Inject or Pax Guice.

[mcculls]

No objections to renaming the git project name to org.ops4j.pax.peaberry. Wrt. general naming: Pax DI could be confused with Pax CDI, and Pax Guice sounds like a fork of Guice, but Pax Inject might work (though then there's a disconnect between the project name and the packages/symbolic names).

[niclash]

Keep the funky name... ;-)
On Jan 9, 2014 8:56 PM, "Stuart McCulloch" [email protected] wrote:

No objections to renaming the git project name to org.ops4j.pax.peaberry.
Wrt. general naming: Pax DI could be confused with Pax CDI, and Pax Guice
sounds like a fork of Guice, but Pax Inject might work (though then there's
a disconnect between the project name and the packages/symbolic names).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2#issuecomment-31928159
.

[tonit]

@niclash Keep the funky red hair.. ;)

You are right Stuart with "Pax Inject" being the only real alternative. Niclas you are right that this does not beat the Peaberry name.

Background from my side: I stumbled over peaberry again as i was following Guices' remainings (very few info on whats behind the mysterious 4.0beta).
Somehow i missed the import of peaberry into ops4j last year.