On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 07:18:17PM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 02:47:49PM -0700, burtonator wrote: > > > > No. Just name it 'freenet' instead of 'Freenet'. There are some strong > > technical reasons why you should have packages as lowercase: > > > > A lot of Java developers (I am not one of them) will look at the > > "Freenet" package and instantly judge its source code quality > > I can't see people that make such superficial judgments being of much > use. And besides, there are plenty of _real_ flaws to find in the source > code ;>
When viewed in the context of most other well-written Java packages, Freenet is certainly the oddball. We have a consolidated Javadoc tree available at http://ariel.w3.org/javadoc/ in which this is clearly visible. It's not particularly attractive for developers working with Freenet as a modular rather than a monolithic entity. org.freenet.etc would not be a crime; Freenet.etc sets a bad precedent. Part of the purpose of Java namespaces is to prevent naming conflicts with other packages. If every project tries to claim a top level domain the way the Freenet project has, a few
