commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [All] Convention for "courtesy" codes?
Date Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:08:12 GMT
If a Java package and artifact ID contain "internal" or "private" in the
name, that would be pretty clear.

Gary

On Feb 10, 2018 07:17, "Stefan Bodewig" <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:

> On 2018-02-10, Gilles wrote:
>
> > Is there a convention for distinguishing codes with
> > compatibility requirements from codes provided as
> > development tools (unit tests, benchmarking, usage
> > examples, integration tests, ...)?
>
> In Compress we once had a package named _internal_ and a package level
> javadoc that said "This package is not part of Commons Compress'
> published API."
>
> http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-compress/
> javadocs/api-1.7/org/apache/commons/compress/compressors/
> z/_internal_/package-summary.html
>
> There also is a package that says "Experimental" in its javadocs, but to
> be honest it hasn't change din years (but likely isn't really used by
> anybody either).
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message