hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org>
Subject Re: HC 5.0: package / module structure; Re: HC 5.0: co-location with HC 4.x
Date Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:56:45 GMT
Am 2015-11-21 um 19:52 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> +1.
>
> I would not mind using Java 8 too.

Believe that is too early. We are using a company-wide, Eclipse 
RCP-based product which is on Eclipse 3.4/3.6 and still HttpClient 3.x. 
I highly doubt that the dev team will jump on e4 and Java 8 features.
Java 7 is a good base line.

Michael

> Gary
> On Nov 21, 2015 9:03 AM, "Oleg Kalnichevski" <oleg@ok2consulting.com> wrote:
>
>> Folks
>>
>> I moved code to org.apache.hc.core5 namespace as the first step.
>>
>> Now I would like to move things around in order to make the package
>> structure more consistent, reduce circular dependencies between packages
>> and prepare for messaging code separation into HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2
>> compliant implementations.
>>
>> However, more importantly I would like to fold httpcore-nio into
>> httpcore. Separation into two modules made sense in 2005 but hardly
>> makes any sense today in 2015.
>>
>> Please let me know if you have any objections to that.
>>
>> Oleg
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 12:32 +0100, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
>>> Folks
>>>
>>> I would like to start working on the first alpha releases of HC 5.0.
>>>
>>> There is one issue that still needs to be discussed though before I can
>>> proceed. We need to decide on how we intent to maintain compatibility
>>> with HC 4.x. It is pretty clear that maintaining full compatibility is
>>> unrealistic and probably counter-productive. HC 5.0 is likely to have
>>> different APIs especially once HTTP/2 transport is implemented.
>>>
>>> A pragmatic approach could be to make HC 5.0 and HC 4.x deployable
>>> within the same class loader context (so called co-location). This is
>>> what Apache Commons do with their major releases. We should do
>>> likewise.
>>>
>>> Effectively co-location is about moving major releases to a new package
>>> space like org.apache.commons.lang3, org.apache.commons.lang4, etc. I
>>> think we should adopt a compatible scheme. The trouble is that when the
>>> project was started in 2005 the choice of 'org.apache.http' was pretty
>>> natural and in line with Jakarta practices (anyone here still remembers
>>> Apache Jakarta?). Now it can be seen as too presumptuous. This would be
>>> a good opportunity to fix that.
>>>
>>> What would be a better name space for the project in your opinion?
>>>
>>> org.apache.http<n>
>>> org.apache.http.hc<n>
>>> org.apache.hc<n>.http
>>> where <n> is a major release version
>>>
>>> Something else? Any thoughts or preferences?
>>>
>>> Oleg
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>>
>>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org


Mime
View raw message