On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 08:50:37AM +1000, Peter Donald wrote: > On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 04:07, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > > > If not, can they still use the name 'commons' ? ( like > > > commons-logging, etc ). > > > > since it is compartmentalised under jakarta, mho is 'yes'. > > The one problem (at least in java land) is that classes are usually > namespaced > in reverse DNS order. ie > > org.apache.commons.X > > which will clash with jakarta commons. Apache.com does not seem to do java > development work so it may be the case where we can move to > > apache.commons.X > > for the Apache commons - thus sidestepping namespace issues. Not sure though.
That's a good point, but I suspect that the new Commons won't be stealing the bottom-level names from Jakarta. For example, if... "org.apache.commons.Jfooness" is a Jakarta Commons project, then Commons will just have to be careful not to reuse that prefix. Anyway, I think the new Commons should provide incentive to the authors of Jfooness so that over time they might want to move their project to the new Commons, at which point in a way they already have a reserved name. -aaron
