It's cumbersome to deal with long names (as well as long URLs). However,
having FQDN'd bundles may avoid some problems; e.g.,is this
agent-1.0.0.jar mine or someone else's? URLs do not completely solve the
problem, as some people (including myself) cache the bundles to avoid
network problems, so that URL!=UID. That's why we follow the equinox's
${symbolic-name}-${version}.jar with FQDN sym-names approach.Just an opinion, though :-) Cheers, Manuel -- Manuel Santillán <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.dit.upm.es/santillan Departamento de Ingeniería de Sistemas Telemáticos Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Avda. Complutense, s/n 28040 Madrid SPAIN Tel. +34 913367366 ext.3034 El lun, 29-05-2006 a las 03:21 -0400, Richard S. Hall escribió: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > On Monday 29 May 2006 14:31, Richard S. Hall wrote: > > > >> Niclas Hedhman wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday 26 May 2006 20:55, Richard S. Hall wrote: > >>> > >>>> I was wondering if it would be better to have: > >>>> > >>>> * pom.groupId = "org.apache.felix" > >>>> * pom.artifactId = "scr" > >>>> > >>>> Thus, the symbolic name would be: > >>>> > >>>> * ${pom.groupId} + "." + ${pom.artifactId} > >>>> > >>> So, the symbolic name == the concatenated group.artifact... How about the > >>> Jar file name?? Is that getting the symbolic name + version ?? > >>> > >> Personally, I would rather have it be artifactId + version because the > >> JAR filenames are way too long currently. > >> > > > > And you don't see a problem with "scr-1.0.0.jar" ending up in potential > > naming > > conflict?? > > > > In conflict with what? The bundle JAR file will be used by the average > user from a URL in OBR like: > > http://incubator.apache.org/felix/obr/scr-1.0.0.jar > > This URL is only intended to be used to install the bundle into the > framework. There is no real reason for people to actually deal with the > JAR file itself. Even then we could just append "felix." to the front or > something, as opposed to "org.apache.felix.". > > > Personally, I have little preference. Eclipse uses FQDN_version.jar, and > > there > > seems to be some reason behind that. > > My preference is to avoid such long file names since I am at the command > line a lot. However, I am flexible on the JAR naming approach. If people > prefer the long name, then so be it. > > -> richard
