Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hc.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "HttpComponents Project" <dev@hc.apache.org>
Message-ID: <1448125282.25520.8.camel@ok2consulting.com>
Subject: HC 5.0: package / module structure; Re: HC 5.0: co-location with HC
 4.x
From: Oleg Kalnichevski <oleg@ok2consulting.com>
To: HttpComponents Project <dev@hc.apache.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:01:22 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1447932726.2577.28.camel@apache.org>
References: <1447932726.2577.28.camel@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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