No problem with them being bad. I agree.
The suggestions was meant to be understood in relation to the
suggestion previously made.
The problem is that there is no natural owner for the generic
interfaces other than Java itself, so far as I can tell.
How about:
apache.river.Lease
apache.river.Transaction
apache.river.Entry
apache.river.jini (service platform)
apache.river.javaspace.JavaSpace
MG
On Dec 22, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:40 PM, Michael McGrady
<[email protected]> wrote:
The changes you would have to make are not the point. Either the
suggestions are good or bad.
They are bad.
How many times is this needed to be repeated; Entry, Lease and
Transaction are not space-only concepts. I have already told you that
"net.jini" is a heritage of a organization, a business unit if you
like, so do a
sed 's/net.jini/org.apache.river/'
and you have a much truer representation of the architectural
structure. Moving "lease" from neutral ground into "javaspaces" only
decreases the decoupling (more coupling), not the other way around.
How can you fail to acknowledge something that obvious?
Lost my head focusing on another problem. Generally toss these out in
a non-waterfall fashion but this one was particularly bad, I agree.
Cheers
Niclas
Michael McGrady
Senior Engineer
Topia Technology, Inc.
1.253.720.3365
[email protected]
