Re: [wildfly-dev] package name change a good idea?
On 2 May 2013, at 16:31, Brian Stansberry <brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I doubt that using org.wildfly for all new packages makes sense (or
is
even being proposed.) Within a given module I'd rather see a coherent
set of packages than a semi-random split based on when a package came
in. So if some new functionality comes into a module with a coherent set
of org.wildfly packages, fine. But if it sprinkles random org.wildfly
stuff around instead of putting pieces in the logical spots in the
existing org.jboss.as tree, that's wrong.
I agree. In the transactions project we have a mix of com.arjuna, com.hp.mw, org.jboss and
probably some other packages that don't spring to mind at the moment. It can be
annoying at times, especially when they fall under the same src root. We had the option to
fix this with version 5 of Narayana, but we decided not to do it. This was because we
didn't want to make it harder to back port features and to search through the history.
Personally, I'd only want to use org.wildfly for new projects where I'm starting
from scratch. I just don't feel the rename buys you enough, to warrant the cost of
harder back-porting and more complex history.
Paul.
--
Paul Robinson
Web Service Transactions Lead
paul.robinson(a)redhat.com
JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Brendan Lane (Ireland), Matt Parson
(USA), Charlie Peters (USA)
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 3.2 KB)