felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Package naming (was Re: [VOTE] Please pick a name for this project)
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:48:27 GMT
I guess I'm not clear on why it all can't be org.apache.felix, including 
bundles and services provided by felix.

My vote doesn't count but if I saw source code named org.apache.osgi I'd 
start looking for it at http://osgi.apache.org. If I couldn't find it 
I'd then go into subversion looking at 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/osgi.  Then I'd give up and go home.

Ralph

Ed Anuff wrote:

>+1 for option #1
>
>it makes it easier to organize the files, since all the files are under
>org/apache/osgi/
>
>Ed
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard S. Hall [mailto:heavy@ungoverned.org] 
>Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 12:51 PM
>To: oscar-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Package naming (was Re: [VOTE] Please pick a name for this
>project)
>
>I am not against renaming the packages, but it would be nice if we could
>
>make this decision once and stick to it. We already discussed this and 
>agreed on the current package naming scheme. I waited to commit source 
>so we could start fresh...so much for that. :-)
>
>We have two options that are only slightly different.
>
>Option #1:
>
>    org.apache.osgi.framework
>    org.apache.osgi.bundle
>    org.apache.osgi.service
>    ...
>
>Option #2:
>
>    org.apache.felix
>    org.apache.osgi.bundle
>    org.apache.osgi.service
>
>The benefit of the #1 is a single package hierarchy that relates 
>everything in a clear and explicit way. The benefits of #2 is shorter 
>package names for the framework and some branding.
>
>Please review the mailing list archive for other arguments.
>
>Let's take a final vote so we can wrap this up and move on to more 
>important things.
>
>-> richard
>
>
>Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On Wednesday 17 August 2005 02:36, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Bennett, Timothy (JIS - Applications) wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Our previous package naming conventions still hold despite the 
>>>>>renaming
>>>>>of the project, correct?
>>>>>    
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Yes. I had already renamed packages and there were no packages named
>>>>oscar, so the name change has not affected package naming at all.
>>>>  
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>This is somewhat not inline with the standard procedures at Apache. 
>>>Although there are both valid exceptions (standards) and exceptions 
>>>for various less obvious reasons (mistakes, over looked, changed 
>>>homes, etc).
>>>
>>>I think the Incubator PMC could give some guidance whether 
>>>org.apache.osgi or org.apache.felix can/should/must be used.
>>>
>>>Personally, I would favour a solution where the Felix implementation 
>>>sits in org.apache.felix and bundles are placed in org.apache.osgi
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>+1, for the reasons mentioned here and the follow-ups: ASF standard 
>>policy and branding. Package names should reflect the projet they 
>>orginate from and not the specification they implement, e.g. Tomcat 
>>isn't in org.apache.servlets and Xerces isn't in org.apache.jaxp.
>>
>>Furthermore, I think our goal and the potential of this projet is to 
>>become a top-level project that hosts both the framework and bundle 
>>subprojects. That would be felix.apache.org and not osgi.apache.org.
>>
>>Sylvain
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message