Re: Java package names
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: From the mentor standpoint, what's important to me is that there is no ASF requirement to change those packages. The community can decide to do it sooner, later, or not at all. The community can decide to make a slew of compatibility wrappers. The community, most importantly, can push toward a release with whatever naming it can reach a consensus on. I would think that it would be considered tacky for us to publish classes in the com.sun.* packages. It's a bit misleading, IMHO. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Java package names
River imported packages of code from the original Sun grant under the name 'com.sun.whatever'. How important is it to change that? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Java package names
if you care to be able to run on a different JVM, than it needs to be fixed. Generally it's bad to rely on some private packages/APIs -M On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: River imported packages of code from the original Sun grant under the name 'com.sun.whatever'. How important is it to change that? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Java package names
From a name and branding perspective, removing the use of com.sun, could help people focus on River as opposed to Sun's Jini Implementation. I have several references to com.sun.jini.start. But, I also have my own fork of 2.1 that I'm still using in active deployments. River should be River. Gregg Wonderly On 10/12/2010 12:21 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: What Benson is talking about is not com.sun packages in the JDK, but that Jini implementation classes resides in com.sun packages (compared to spec classes residing in net.jini space) They should go as part of a suitable level bump in versioning. The impact on users is reasonably small... Niclas On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorfmat...@apache.org wrote: if you care to be able to run on a different JVM, than it needs to be fixed. Generally it's bad to rely on some private packages/APIs -M On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Benson Marguliesbimargul...@gmail.com wrote: River imported packages of code from the original Sun grant under the name 'com.sun.whatever'. How important is it to change that? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Java package names
From the mentor standpoint, what's important to me is that there is no ASF requirement to change those packages. The community can decide to do it sooner, later, or not at all. The community can decide to make a slew of compatibility wrappers. The community, most importantly, can push toward a release with whatever naming it can reach a consensus on. On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Christopher Dolan christopher.do...@avid.com wrote: I vote against such an incompatible change. There are a lot of classes under there, for example com.sun.jini.thread.TaskManager, that are utility code employed by downstream developers. I think all new code should go elsewhere if possible, but changing the existing com.sun.jini packages would be hard on existing users. Chris -Original Message- From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:51 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org; river-...@incubator.apache.org Subject: Java package names River imported packages of code from the original Sun grant under the name 'com.sun.whatever'. How important is it to change that? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: Java package names
I vote against such an incompatible change. There are a lot of classes under there, for example com.sun.jini.thread.TaskManager, that are utility code employed by downstream developers. I think all new code should go elsewhere if possible, but changing the existing com.sun.jini packages would be hard on existing users. Chris -Original Message- From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:51 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org; river-...@incubator.apache.org Subject: Java package names River imported packages of code from the original Sun grant under the name 'com.sun.whatever'. How important is it to change that?
