Mailing-List: contact jspwiki-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jspwiki-dev@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <326300158.1229988824170.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 15:33:44 -0800 (PST)
From: "Craig Russell (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: jspwiki-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (JSPWIKI-38) Rename packages to
 "org.apache.jspwiki"
In-Reply-To: <13380135.1195162423024.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-38?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12658715#action_12658715 ] 

Craig Russell commented on JSPWIKI-38:
--------------------------------------

> What I am looking for here is that I strongly believe that API classes should be isolated in their own package hierarchy in order to provide a clear visual and logical separation of the implementation classes. It does not have to be called "org.apache.jspwiki.api" - it could also be called "org.jspwiki" or "org.apache.wiki" - whatever.

If you're in Apache, you're in the apache name space: org.apache.jspwiki or org.apache.whateverWeChangeTheNameToNext. 

As far as I know, we're not talking about multiple independent implementations of a standard or common API. So having an org.apache.wiki interface doesn't sound right.

But let's not continue on the thread of discussing keeping the com.ecyrd.jspwiki name space in Apache. That is a non-starter.

> Rename packages to "org.apache.jspwiki"
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JSPWIKI-38
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-38
>             Project: JSPWiki
>          Issue Type: Task
>            Reporter: Janne Jalkanen
>            Assignee: Janne Jalkanen
>             Fix For: 3.0
>
>


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.