geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: [JSR-88] Which Java Package?
Date Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:07:36 GMT
I would not worry too much about it right now.  If you want to code 
something, pick a package and go with it.  Eventually we will be 
re-packaging to better reflect the modular nature of the system, where 
the module name is the final suffix of the package... like common is 
org.apache.geronimo.common and such.

Anyways, just pick something for now and we will worry about it later.


On Thursday, August 14, 2003, at 10:55  AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> 	I'm fine with .server and .tool, but I don't think .common is
> necessarily right for the other stuff.  I guess by "the other stuff", 
> I'm
> thinking of any kind of "back end logic" responsible for doing stuff on
> the server side, that won't be exposed to the client.
> 	Just saying that though makes me think that perhaps ".server"
> doesn't mean what we want it to mean.  Perhaps they should be
> .enterprise.deploy.provider  // the JSR-88 provider code
> .enterprise.deploy.tool      // the JSR-88 tool code
> .enterprise.deploy.server    // the back-end Geronimo logic that
>                              // is not specific to JSR-88
> 	My only concern is that if we have any subpackages, a 7-part
> package name is kind of gross.
> Aaron
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Jonathan Duty wrote:
>> How about
>> geronimo.enterprise.deploy.common
>> geronimo.enterprise.deploy.server
>> geronimo.enterprise.deploy.tool
>> Let me know if I'm totally not understanding things (which could very
>> well be). ~Jonathan

View raw message