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 (was: When are you going to move packages to org.apache.pivot?)
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:04:16 GMT
Note that preferring "pivot.*" to "org.apache.*" isn't meant as an  
affront to Apache per se. We came up with the Pivot package structure  
long before we became an Apache project. Many things in Pivot are an  
attempt to do something in a way that we think is better than it has  
been done before. This is simply another example of that philosophy.

On Jun 5, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Greg Brown wrote:

>> java and javax are reserved namespaces for platform classes, so I
>> don't see their relevance here.
> The relevance is that Pivot's classes are meant to replace many of  
> these platform classes, and should therefore be given equal billing.
>> Regarding "outdated"...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 outdated variety.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 I'm suggesting that the TLD prefix is outdated. I'd much prefer  
> "junit.*" to "org.junit.*", for example. How likely is a project to  
> use classes from "org.junit" and "com.junit" at the same time (if  
> the latter even existed)? IMO, not very. I'm assuming that's why  
> Microsoft dropped the convention when they came up with the C#  
> coding standards.
>> 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.
> I understand that this is a minor distinction, but Sun's naming  
> guidelines make any classes not developed by Sun for the java(x).*  
> package seem like second-class citizens. It's hard enough as it is  
> to convince developers to use Pivot instead of the "official" UI  
> toolkits provided by Sun. Why make it any more difficult than it  
> needs to be?
> OTOH, it is worth asking the question of whether or not the  
> "pivot.*" naming convention might actually make a developer *less*  
> likely to use Pivot. For better or worse, TLD naming is an  
> established convention, and going against the grain may provide some  
> developers with another reason *not* to use Pivot.
> What do others think?

View raw message