package naming

[Cris J. Holdorph]

This is a relatively minor point, but one that I hope will help me
understand things better.

I was looking at the open under open-experiments/slingtests/osgikernel
and I noticed two different java package naming patterns

org.sakaiproject.kernel2
org.sakaiproject.kernel

is there a difference between things that are in one of those versus the
other? Even more confusing, i noticed the code with the java package
"org.sakaiproject.kernel" uses a maven group/artifact id that starts
with "org.sakaiproject.kernel2.osgi". It adds a '2' and an 'osgi' to
the mix. Now, I certainly don't expect the maven group/artifact id to
match the java package structure, but right now they're close enough
that I'm slightly confused.

Thanks,

---- Cris J H

[Ian Boston]

Yes they are confused,
part of the rush to port to OSGi.
I dont really mind what the base is called but I agree it should be
consistent, probably
org.sakaiproject.kernel should be the base for packages and bundles.
WDYT ?

Ian

[Cris J. Holdorph]

yeah, i think version numbers belong in the maven artifact version,
rather then the package names, but that's just IMHO.

---- Cris J H

[Carl Hall]

+1 for org.sakaiproject.kernel

[Anthony Whyte]

+1 org.sakaiproject.kernel

Anthony

> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Sakai Kernel" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sakai-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sakai-kernel
> +unsub...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/
> group/sakai-kernel?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
>
>

[Ian Boston]

Ok I think that there is quite a bit of agreement on this, I will see
what a refactor looks like. Its going to be big. So I will push to a
branch first.

Ian

[Ian Boston]

Ok everything is refactored in a branch which is here.

http://github.com/ieb/open-experiments/tree/package-refactor

I dont really want to leave this too long as I suspect its going to be
hard to maintain.
The changes are extensive and *will* impact anyone with branches that
are out there, so have a good look.

Ian
(I dont know how git does it, the push for the branch went up in < 2s,
for such a big branch on a slow connection thats good, svn would have
been at least a minute :) )

On 25 Apr 2009, at 05:19, Anthony Whyte wrote: