harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Testing
Date Tue, 02 May 2006 07:42:30 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Ok - so this is an aspect of modularization, rather than some deranged
> bending of package implementation?  :D

Yes.

> So if a "module" has public packages A, B and C would it be :

.. and therein lies the problem, there is no such thing as a 'public
package' and a 'non-public' package in Java syntax (yet), so we have the
naming convention.

> org.apache.harmony.module.A
> org.apache.harmony.module.B
> org.apache.harmony.module.C
> org.apache.harmony.module.internal
>
> not
> 
> org.apache.harmony.module.A
> org.apache.harmony.module.A.internal
> org.apache.harmony.module.B
> org.apache.harmony.module.B.internal
> org.apache.harmony.module.C
> org.apache.harmony.module.C.internal

Yep.

Regards,
Tim


> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> '.internal.' is used to denote packages containing types that are wholly
>> the business of a particular module; whereas non-internal packages
>> contain types that can be called from other modules (e.g. utilities) and
>> are expected to be stable.
>>
>> In OSGi speak, we will export all packages that are *not* marked
>> '.internal.', and all packages that are marked as '.internal.' will not
>> be exported.
>>
>> The naming convention is simply our convention to identify
>> internal-APIs, it is not required by OSGi/Eclipse/...
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>
>>> Oliver Deakin wrote:
>>>> George Harley wrote:
>>>>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>>>>> Of course, the text module has only "implementation-independent tests
>>>>> that designed to be run from classpath". For modules that have got
>>>>> implementation-specific tests then I suppose we could use something
>>>>> like "org.apache.harmony.[module].tests.impl.[package under test]" or
>>>>> "org.apache.harmony.[module].tests.internal.[package under test]"
>>>>> etc. I've got no preference.
>>>> I think impl is preferable over internal here, as we already use
>>>> internal in our implementation package names to indicate classes
>>>> totally internal to that bundle. To also use internal to label tests
>>>> that are implementation specific may cause confusion.
>>> I think the whole 'internal' thing is just awful IMO. (Man, it feels
>>> good to stay that...)
>>>
>>> Why do we need it?  Eclipse?  OSGi?
>>>
>>> Isn't it pre-supposing a packaging system in the source code structur?
>>> (one that I think is pretty unnatural for java programmers....)
>>>
>>> I'm 100% behind offering the Harmony classlibs packaged for OSGi, but
>>> I'm 100% against assuming it's the only way to go...
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message