hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Osipov" <1983-01...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: Re: Re: HC 5.0: co-location with HC 4.x
Date Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:13:17 GMT
> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 12:42 +0100, Michael Osipov wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 23:27 +0000, sebb wrote:
> > > > On 19 November 2015 at 21:17, Michael Osipov <michaelo@apache.org>
wrote:
> > > > > Am 2015-11-19 um 12:32 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > First of all, I wouldn't use any of those. (Currently referring to
package
> > > > > names only). Artifact ids are a different story.
> > > > >
> > > > > org.apache.http: that is too general and confuses me with Apache
HTTP
> > > > > Server.
> > > > > org.apache.http.hc: http seems redundant here due to hc (http components).
> > > > > org.apache.hc<n>.http: same here.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would do:
> > > > >
> > > > > HC Core: org.apache.hc.core5
> > > > > HC Client: org.apache.hc.client5
> > > > > HC Async Cilent: org.apache.hc.asyncclient5
> > > > >
> > > > > Clean and simple. Each project would be scoped in its namespace.
Picking up
> > > > > sebb's opinion, we even reflect the HTTP domain in the package name.
> > > > 
> > > > It's not just my _opinion_.
> > > > We cannot freely choose the package name, because we are not the only
> > > > Java project in the world, nor even in the org.apache namespace.
> > > > 
> > > > Likewise we cannot use the domain com.oracle or com.ibm or even com.apache.
> > > > We MUST use the ASF domain as the package name prefix or there is a
> > > > risk of clashes with 3rd party software.
> > > > 
> > > > org.apache.hc should be OK, since we already use HC for the website.
> > > > It's very unlikely that any other ASF project will be named HC.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Would this be all right for everyone?
> > > 
> > > org.apache.hc.core5.http
> > 
> > Why do you want to use the redundant 'http'?
> 
> While not very likely we might have non HTTP protocol support as well,
> such as Websockets.

I see but WebSockets share no common code with HTTP except the initial handshake.
I would rather see this as another top level project because HttpClient's API is
highly optimized for HTTP and not a general-purpose one like Commons VFS.

Michael

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


Mime
View raw message