jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Meschberger <Felix.Meschber...@day.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Revert the great split
Date Mon, 12 Sep 2005 07:45:36 GMT
Hi,

>commons will go to: org.apache.jackrabbit.util.*
>  
>
Considering, what is now found in the commons library (name, util, uuid, 
value), I don't think those should be moved down the package hierarchy. 
In fact, these already are four distinct packages. The remaing classes 
in o.a.j, are not really "util" classes. They are rather common grounds, 
which IMHO is very well suited for o.a.j.

BTW: BaseException does not sound very interesting - what is it a basis 
for anyway ? How about renaming it to JackrabbitException ?

BTW2: Is there are reason, why BaseException does not extend 
RepositoryException ?

>core will go to: org.apache.jackrabbit.jcr.*
>  
>
Sounds good for me :-)

>api would go to: org.apache.jackrabbit.* but is currently empty.
>
>i'm not happy with the api packaging, but i can't come up with a
>better solution.
>  
>
As there is no defined Jackrabbit API yet and considering that this API 
will not be that big, I think we can currently live with that situation.

>please note, that the refactoring will break all existing
>configurations, since the class names (eg of the persistence managers)
>are referenced in the xmls. maybe we could provide a backward
>compatibility mapping in the config reader which logs a deprecation
>warning. on the other hand, 1.0 is not released yet, and we should not
>respect backward compatibility too much.
>  
>
I tend to agree with the last statement and not introduce deprecation 
and backward compatibility hacks in a not-yet-released product.

Regards
Felix


Mime
View raw message