[seam-dev] package naming conventions

[Dan Allen]

Good suggestions. We should merge these into the guidelines page.

I have also updated the intro guidelines page to clarify that it's an open
book and we are willing to discuss it if you don't agree (within reason).

http://seamframework.org/Seam3/DevelopmentGuidelines

-Dan

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:

> The basic rules are:
>
> * Do not share packages between modules. This will lead to breakage, and
> due to the ways in which accessibility works in Java will have unintended
> consequences. Every class in a module should be namespaced to the relevant
> package
> * Split out your API from your impl (so don't put impl classes into the
> same package)
> * Keep things simple, don't produce overly complex, hard to navigate
> hierarchies. In general you should put all your public API into a single
> package. If you need to split it up, split it up by function NOT by
> classification. For example, with security, we might want to split up the
> API like:
>
> org.jboss.seam.security.identity
> org.jboss.seam.security.auth
>
> or with JSF, like:
>
> org.jboss.seam.faces.scopes
> org.jboss.seam.faces.messages
>
> I don't think splitting things up by classification makes life easy for the
> user, as they struggle to find what they need, and understand how the
> various bits of the API inter relate.
>
> On 4 Apr 2010, at 07:24, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > As a consumer I would love to see all
> qualifiers/annotations/interceptors/decorators/etc in the same package, it
> just makes things easier to find when you're looking for classes or javadoc.
>  This is also probably easier for people migrating from Seam2 to understand
> how to easily migrate.
> >
> > Exactly! -- We should add decorators to the naming conventions
> established for interceptors:
> >
> > Regardless of module, the following naming standards should be followed
> for Interceptors and Decorators:
> >
> > org.jboss.seam.intercept.[name]Interceptor;
> > org.jboss.seam.decorate.[name]Decorator;
> >
> > I don't necessarily agree on all Qualifiers & annotations; though, I
> don't necessarily disagree either. I think packaging annotations and
> qualifiers with their relevant packages is probably the best way to go,
> since they will be near other relevant classes in the package. Interceptors
> and Decorators have the problem that users may need to register them
> manually in beans.xml, thus, using a standard package will be a bigger
> convenience, still not a technical necessity. Basically -- I'm asking to be
> convinced ;)
> >
> > --Lincoln
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 11:21, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Module writers,
> >
> > For as much as we all enjoy discussing things like naming conventions
> (not), I do feel that we need to establish some consistency across modules.
> Rather than devising some arbitrary scheme, I'd rather build on the package
> name choices that are coming out of the modules and try to align on what
> seems natural.
> >
> > Tihomir raised an important point with respect to qualifiers. When doing
> XML Bean Config, the configuration is clearer if qualifiers are in their own
> package so they can be bound to a unique namespace prefix. This helps
> distinguish the qualifier elements from the class elements (like class name,
> method, field, etc). As for other annotations, Seam has traditionally put
> them in the "annotations" subpackage, which Shane has done in remoting and
> security.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> > --
> > Dan Allen
> > Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> > Registered Linux User #231597
> >
> > http://mojavelinux.com
> > http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> > http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > seam-dev mailing list
> > seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jason Porter
> >
> > Software Engineer
> > Open Source Advocate
> >
> > PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > seam-dev mailing list
> > seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Baxter, III
> > http://ocpsoft.com
> > http://scrumshark.com
> > "Keep it Simple"
> > _______________________________________________
> > seam-dev mailing list
> > seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>



-- 
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/seam-dev/attachments/20100407/a6d34c3b/attachment-0001.html