Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of hedhman@gmail.com designates
 209.85.146.183 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:from:organization:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id:sender;
        b=ho0bCNmXh02bGjH7mHGzhPkF8l3vv/SyhfuYn+OMlwR8dvESIxhqqvU3ZlVqvdCzmYovCw15fGJBFvEQUvQpTJxmZnPtU6/6RSyE2bwPWftFW9KAPFhE3iegjGxgMq5r/Q9ATuOeSl80hD47eFSExjRYz7PxDqwJ0aSGizLAc28=
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
Organization: Private
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Discuss: Package Naming for Incubator Release of River
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 01:14:55 +0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
References: <46A328DE.3060504@dcrdev.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <46A328DE.3060504@dcrdev.demon.co.uk>
Cc: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200707230114.55899.niclas@hedhman.org>
Sender: Niclas Hedhman <hedhman@gmail.com>

On Sunday 22 July 2007 17:52, Dan Creswell wrote:
> We would appreciate some clarification in respect of the above and some
> guidance on what the minimum requirements might be. =A0For example would
> it be acceptable to create a compatibility layer and thus, for at least
> this first release, have both com.sun and org.apache namespaces present
> in our codebase and release? =A0This would allow our users some time to
> transition smoothly to the new package namespace.

IMHO, yes transitional solutions are acceptable, and possibly even preferab=
le.

*I* would like to see;

=46irst Incubating Release - current package names.

Then (optionally) - compatibility layer where org.apache.river wraps the
                    com.sun.jini classes.

Last Incubating release - the com.sun.jini classes are the wrappers to the
                          org.apache.river classes.

=46irst Full Apache release - only org.apache.river classes.

And I also think there is no contention about keeping the net.jini API clas=
ses=20
as-is, without package name changes, which is what the majority of the Jini=
=20
users actually refers to.

Would that work?


Cheers
Niclas

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org