On Dec 31, 11:11 am, Mark Murphy <mmur...@commonsware.com> wrote: > jotobjects wrote: > > Again, IMHO this is the kind of convention that ideally would be > > adhered to and documented. > > Unfortunately, this sort of documentation is only truly practical for > the core Android team. It's their apparent convention, and only they can > officially say what is and is not considered part of the SDK. You or I > can only attempt to steer people in directions of hopeful success. > > > For instance in the Java API you can count on java.* and > > javax.*classes being part of the pubic API (and that is documented at > > least indirectly that these are reserved package names). Conversely > > you can be sure that com.sun.* classes are NOT part of the public API > > and they should be used with caution and rarely. > > Precisely!
Sounds like we have two votes for the core Android team to document the package naming convention. The goal is to make it easier to support the framework and easier for developers to avoid driving off course. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
