John McNally <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It has bugged me for some time that the om and peer objects are in
> different packages. There are places where it would make much more
> sense to make an attribute or method package friendly or protected and
> we cannot do so because these closely related classes are in separate
> packages largely for source file organization. I am pretty sure no one
> would agree that is a good way to use packages, so is there some other
> benefit that anyone sees to this arrangement?
The package structure is currently being used to group files
heirarchically, like in a file system. This is organized, but not a
proper use of packages. The point of a Java package is to hold a
group of classes that work together. The om and peer classes have a
symbiotic relationship, so this is a perfect example of two types of
classes that should be in the same package. The Scheduler service is
an example of where this layout is currently used in Turbine.
> In the latest torque version, I have moved the BaseXXX classes to a
> .base subpackage again as a way to keep them out of the way, when I did
> this I put the BaseXXX and BaseXXXPeer classes all in the same package.
> But the movement into the .base package still does not allow the use of
> package friendly methods. Because the non Base classes are not in the
> package.
>
> I would really like all these files to be in the same package as I think
> it is the most correct. However for a large database schema it will
> lead to a lot of classes in one package. Any disagreements to using one
> package?
+1 on one package.
> The other thing I would like some comment on is the reservations people
> would have to violating the file hierarchy/package structure symmetry
> that is generally followed in java src trees. If we put all the om/peer
> objects in one package but still present the source files as
>
> om/
> om/peer
> om/base
> om/base/peer
>
> would this cause any problems or criticism?
I don't follow you.
--
Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
