----- Original Message ----- From: "Thorsten Scherler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 10:35 PM Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Plugin and themes naming convention
| El vie, 10-02-2006 a las 14:14 +0000, Ross Gardler escribió: | > Thorsten Scherler wrote: | > > El vie, 10-02-2006 a las 13:04 +0000, Ross Gardler escribió: | > > | > >>Plugins are called something like: | > >> | > >>org.foodomain.forrest.plugin.bar | > >> | > >>i.e. "plugin" is singular | > >> | > >>But we have two themes which: | > >> | > >>org.apache.forrest.theme.Coat | > >> | > >>and | > >> | > >>org.apache.forrest.themes.core | > >> | > >>i.e. "theme" and "themes" is used | > >> | > >>I propose that we normalise on the existing naming convention used in | > >>plugins, i.e. we use "theme" (singular) | > >> | > > | > > | > > -1 for theme. | > > | > > +1 for normalise. | > > | > > Since core is providing not only *one* theme (singular) but at least 3 | > > (coat, pelt, common) it makes more sense to call theme packages | > > "org.apache.forrest.themes.x". | > | > That is true for themes.core, but (probably) not true for third party | > themes, which will be singular, and hopefully more common. | | Hmm, the idea is (or was original) that you can provide a themes package | for e.g. css-zengarden and there you would have a collection of themes | within. | | ...but I see your point and have to think about a wee bit more. | | | > More importantly, the plural is different to the plugin convention, | > which serves to confuse. It is this confusion I am trying to avoid. The singular .theme.x makes more sense to me. The majority would be a singular theme. Matching the singular .plugin. is a bonus. | > | > >>---- | > >> | > >>On a related issue. We have no consistency in the naming of plugins. | > >> | > >>I have tried to follow the Java convention of lower case for the | > >>"package" names and Camel case for the plugin name: | > >> | > >>i.e. org.apache.forrest.plugin.input.FooBar | > >> | > >>I propose that new releases of plugins should all conform to the camel | > >>case usage. We'll keep the current naming for already released plugins. | > > | > > | > > hmm, I find it harder to use the Uppercase variant on linux and since | > > java packages do not use uppercase in package names (e.g. package | > > org.apache.lenya.transaction;). | > > | > > See above, I see plugins more as a packages and I am not very happy with | > > naming them org.apache.forrest.plugin.input.FooBar because for me that | > > is a package and not a Class. | > | > Yeah, I see your point, I interpret it the other way around A package | > name relates to a bunch of related classes, a class is not necessarily a | > single class (inner classes). | > | > So a package name is org.apache.forrest.plugins.input and a class name | > is ProjectInfo (for example). | > | > However, your argument has just as much merit. In this case I don't | > really care which way we go, as long as we are consistent. So we need at | > least one more person to express a preference and I'll be happy to go | > with whatever it is. | | same here. I prefer all lower case to match the rest of the reference. Either all lower or all CamelCase, it.Looks.messy.mixing.TheTwo. Both my reasonings above are purely cosmetic constistency. My 2 cents :) Gav... | | salu2 | -- | Thorsten Scherler | COO Spain | Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya | http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | | | -- | No virus found in this incoming message. | Checked by AVG Free Edition. | Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.4/255 - Release Date: 9/02/2006 | | -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.4/255 - Release Date: 9/02/2006
