I'm not against a package rename but against the version number. The only benefit of putting a version number in, is to help tap4 users now. But who will care about tap4 in 2 years? The version number will still be in the code base by then. If the official version number of tapestry is changing from 5 to 2011 or whatsoever, developers will at best be irritated by the tapestry5 package names
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Sven Homburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > markus, > > i voted for package renaming like "org.apache.tapestry5" > but i go even conform with your mind. > > if i read the reason for the package renaming, i was relay > alienated for that, > > but on the other side, i am not sure, its more easier for > some tap4 user to migrate slowly to tap5. > > but i am not sure, in our real fast spinning world, > if there are much developer they say "i migrate tommorow" > and belive their own mind voice. > > 2008/5/19 Markus Joschko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Looks like I am alone but I don't like the idea of putting version >> numbers into package names. >> In the highly unlikely case that there will be a tapestry 6 (not for >> technical but solely for marketing reasons ;-)) it might confuse >> developers. Are the classes in tapestry5 still valid or not? >> >> Only developers who will run tapestry4 and 5 in one webapplication >> might have the problem of distinguishing between the packages. >> I guess that they are the minority and it might be reasonable for them >> to read the class comments if they are in doubt which package belongs >> to which tapestry version. >> >> so -1 for a tapestry5 or v5. >> >> my 2cents, >> Markus >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Blower, Andy >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I agree. >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Massimo Lusetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Sent: 19 May 2008 16:02 >> >> To: Tapestry users >> >> Subject: Re: Instability in Tapestry 5.0.12-SNAPSHOT >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > The question is: would it have been better to just broadly rename >> >> > org.apache.tapestry to org.apache.tapestry5? There was quite a bit >> >> of >> >> > discussion back on forth among the developers on this one. >> >> >> >> I would say yes. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Massimo >> >> http://meridio.blogspot.com >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > -- > with regards > Sven Homburg > http://tapestry5-components.googlecode.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
