On 27 April 2006 at 3:16, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Mikhail Loenko wrote: > > > > The question is where we put 'classpath' test. If we put them into > > o.a.h.module.tests.[package under test] we result in that ugly > > package names like > > o.a.h.security.tests.o.a.h.security.util > > Why not > > o.a.h.security.tests.util > > ?
Exactly. After the prefix we can drop any repetition and still have a reasonably clear mapping between code and the tests that test them. We'd only have a problem if we created classes like: o.a.h.security.java.blah or: o.a.h.security.javax.blah but I can't see any logical reason to why we'd do that. Paulex wrote: > I consider the module name is optional and can be removed I think we should consider the module name a mandatory part of the prefix (for classes where we have the freedom to specify the prefix obviously). It's mandatory for the o.a.h classlib classes it should be for the tests too. Regards, Mark. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
