[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] new services

On 21/04/07, Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm not stuck on the name. alternatives would be greatly appreciated. Note that there are others like .ds, .scr, .. that are not immediately obvious. That is the nature of acronyms. We can go for full descriptive names. I tend to shy away from partial shortenings if possible. decserv just grates. initprov is not so bad I guess. But one has to wonder what we are saving over full names.

Are you prevented from using org.eclipse.equinox.osgi.provisioning? If so, then org.eclipse.equionx.initialprovisioning seems like a good choice. I don't think there's any great benefit in making the package name shorter, other than a nod to the amount of extra space that would be consumed by the permgenspace for the UFT8 constant.

Anyway, like I said, I'm open to suggestions.  Remember that in general we
have a policy of coordinating the bundle name and the "dominant package"
name.  That is, whatever bundle name we choose will likely be reflected in
various ways in the package names.

Speaking of which, what's up with the number of things prefixed with 'equinox'? Some items, like the provisioning, don't seem to be particularly Equinox specific. There's also a point that some of these OSGi-related services would happily run (and do) on different OSGi engines; the name doesn't particularly help advertise the fact that they're not Equinox- (or even Eclipse-) specific.

Having said that, I guess there's nothing we can do about that now.