portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ate Douma <...@douma.nu>
Subject Re: Naming Conventions in Spring configs (Was: Re: New development branch)
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:42:33 GMT
(Renamed the subject)

Randy Watler wrote:
> All,
> 
> I voted +1 on this issue, but I assumed that we would not be using 
> totally unqualified names... that could indeed cause integration 
> problems. For example, I thought that soemthing like 'j2.page-manager' 
> seemed short AND isolated to J2. Names like 
> 'org.apache.jetspped.page.PageManager' are just too long. I am still +1 
> provided we have a relatively unique short prefix like 'j2'.
I'm +1 on that solution. As long as we have a unique namespace prefix.

> 
> Randy
> 
> David Le Strat wrote:
> 
>> On simplified naming conventions in the Spring
>> configs, I am -1 as well. I agree with Ate and Keith.
>>
>> --- Ate Douma <ate@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>> Scott T Weaver wrote:
>>>   
>>>
>>>> Yup, see bullet point 5 ;)
>>>>     
>>>
>>> I'm not sure you two are talking about the same
>>> thing here...
>>>
>>> Is bullet point 5) about the simplified naming
>>> conventions in the Spring configs?
>>> Or is Raphaƫl talking about the refactoring of our
>>> packages we discussed several weeks ago?
>>>
>>> For the record: I've decided I'm -1 on the
>>> simplified naming conventions in the Spring configs
>>> as it kills the namespace benefit which also has
>>> been pointed out by Keith Garry Boyce.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ate
>>>   


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@portals.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@portals.apache.org


Mime
View raw message