pivot-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: When are you going to move packages to org.apache.pivot?
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:38:05 GMT
That is a sentimental value that doesn't hold for Apache projects. You
are almost an Apache project. That means org.apache.foo. I understand
you have a lot of pride for pivot, but it is now *Apache Pivot* (at
least after graduation).

"Org.apache.* is a way to let the programmer know that they're using
an Apache product and IMO its important to make that transition as
part of incubation." - Sanjeeva Weerawarana

"[...] switching to the o.a. package space is a graduation requirement
at the very least." - Noel Bergman

java and javax are reserved namespaces for platform classes, so I
don't see their relevance here.

Regarding "outdated"... not using the reversed fully qualified domain
name was the way old projects named their packages. That is the
outdated variety. Even junit, which is has been around since the early
days has converted to org.junit.

I don't see pivot.* being any less official than org.apache.pivot.*.
You have the full might of Apache there, and there's no need to have
to type in those package names anymore with current IDEs.


On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Greg Brown<gkbrown@mac.com> wrote:
> They have always been "pivot.*" by design. I've personally never been a big
> fan of the "org.*" or "com.*" naming scheme. I think it is outdated and
> needlessly verbose (.NET doesn't use it, and it makes the code more
> readable, IMO).
> Also, not all Java package names begin with "org" or "com"; e.g. "java.*",
> "javax.*", and "javafx.*". Pivot provides functionality that competes
> directly with classes that live in these packages. The "pivot.*" name is
> meant to convey a stronger sense of credibility - it implies that these
> classes are on par with their JDK equivalents. Otherwise, they seem less
> "official". It would be unfortunate if we had to change it.
> On Jun 5, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Christopher Brind<brindy@brindy.org.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> - Is it compulsory?  It makes sense, but I just wonder if it is mandated.
>> To the point of getting harassed vehemently. AFAIK it is a blocker for
>> graduation. All incubating projects have done so, and the only reason
>> not to do it is having to comply with a standard.
>> Martijn

Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Apache Wicket 1.3.5 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.

View raw message