incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <m...@leosimons.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Packages renaming and backward compatibility (was: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator)
Date Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:03:58 GMT
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com> wrote:
> Leo, are you out there?

Hmm? Oh, this again...

Having company names or trademarks in java namespaces is a pretty
stupid convention. It gets us mess like this...

There is no policy that incubating java projects must rename to use an
org.apache namespace. There has never been such a policy. We don't
need such a policy. There's (typically/usually/knock on wood) no
legal/trademark issue. There's ample precedent of keeping 'legacy'
namespaces around 'a while' for backwards compatibility. And that's
fine.

At the same time, (incubating) projects should definitely carefully
consider whether it is reasonable to change their namespaces, how to
go about it, etc. Incubation can be a good time and/or trigger to make
such changes, especially for projects for whom backwards compatibility
isn't a big issue (yet) or that are doing a major revision as part of
coming here.

With my incubator PMC hat on, I like to see that a project community
has thought this situation through, discussed it on their dev list,
and got to some kind of consensus on what to do. I'd imagine such
plans will include a strategy for eventually having all their code end
up in an org.apache namespace or at least not in a com.<company>
namespace.

I'm sure other people said all this already, apologies for the noise,
but hey, I got prodded, so... :-)


cheerio,


Leo

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


Mime
View raw message