@oliver: the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a technical concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums, exceptions,... regards, gerhard 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>: > There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put > annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not want > to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a good > thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of > particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not as > important as designing it as modular as we can. > > And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave mistakes > of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of > dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API" > interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration or > DateTime class;-O > > Werner > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer < > o.b.fisc...@swe-blog.net> > wrote: > > > @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such > > package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where a > > the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation > > package." > > > > Oliver > > > > > > Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek: > > > > @romain: +1 > >> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part > >> of > >> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes", > >> "interfaces",...) > >> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since > they > >> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning). > >> > >> regards, > >> gerhard > >> > >> > >> > >> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> See DeviceMap that's an option, too. > >>> > >>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception" > >>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, > >>> why > >>> not. > >>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather > >>> than > >>> passing around names and structures;-) > >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > >>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event, > >>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >>>> @rmannibucau > >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com > >>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > >>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. > I > >>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless > we > >>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a > >>>>> > >>>> separate > >>> > >>>> place. > >>>>> > >>>>> Werner > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau < > >>>>> > >>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring > much > >>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package > >>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >>>>>> @rmannibucau > >>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com > >>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > >>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray < > aalmi...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +1 on "annotation" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast > >>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray > >>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator. > >>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> binary, > >>>> > >>>>> and > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> those who don't. > >>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil < > werner.k...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE ( > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) > >>> > >>>> you'll > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to > >>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that > >>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation" > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> , > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> too. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Werner > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > > -- > > N Oliver B. Fischer > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany > > P +49 30 44793251 > > M +49 178 7903538 > > E o.b.fisc...@swe-blog.net > > S oliver.b.fischer > > J oliver.b.fisc...@jabber.org > > X http://xing.to/obf > > > > >
