pivot-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Brown <gkbr...@mac.com>
Subject Re: Package names
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:10:30 GMT
It could potentially go there (as could the web project). The only  
thing I'd want to ensure is that we didn't introduce any dependencies  
on other Commons libraries (unless there were very, very strong  
reasons to do so).

On Jun 5, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Christopher Brind wrote:

> Apache Commons would be a better context for them, IMHO.  But then  
> it comes
> down to control ... ;-)
> 2009/6/5 Greg Brown <gkbrown@mac.com>
>> As for the 'replacement' classes, take pivot.collections - to be  
>> honest, I
>>> don't see what the classes in that package have to do with an  
>>> RIA.  Given
>>> that they are designed to compete with Java's collections classes  
>>> then
>>> really they should be in their own project, e.g. Apache Commons?    
>>> This
>>> would give them even more credibility as a replacement for the  
>>> platform
>>> collections instead of being burried in an RIA project.
>> I agree. I think it would make sense to draw more attention to  
>> Pivot's
>> component parts: core, wtk, web, and charts. They could all  
>> potentially
>> still live under the Pivot umbrella, but exist as projects unto  
>> themselves.
>> They are already structured this way in SVN, so this would be more  
>> of a
>> documentation change than anything else.

View raw message