[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: Re[4]: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions

It would be better to have a more descriptive bundle symbollic name,
that's for sure. The question then becomes whether it makes sense to
keep the bundle symbolic name and package name in sync. Given that
most package imports are handled automatically by Eclipse anyway, the
only reason I can think for having a shorter package name is that it
takes up a few less chars in the various UTF-8 constant pools in the
.class files; but if that were really an issue, we'd be calling the
packages o.e.eq.ip anyway.

The danger with using 'ip' as the package name is that it effectively
prevents anyone from having a package with the same name for unrelated
services; for example, an OSGi bundle for generating ICMP IP packets.

I'd vote for a longer name in both cases. Not that my vote counts for
anything, but as a periodic lurker on the mailing list ...

Alex.

On 08/07/07, Pavlin Dobrev <p.dobrev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Alex,

My personal opinion also is that IP is a horible name but maybe as BJ
propose we can use long bundle symbolic name?

-Pavlin

AB> I'm glad I'm not alone. I've asked the question to a wider audience to
AB> see if they'd get the reference:

AB> http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t98469.html

AB> On 07/07/07, Remy Chi Jian Suen <remy.suen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> You're not alone, Alex. I think ip is a horrible name.
>> initprovisioning or initprov or something would've been better.
>> There's just no way that someone's going to know that 'ip' is 'initial
>> provisioning'.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rem
>>
>> On 7/7/07, Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Am I really the only one who thinks '.ip'  is a bad name?
>> >
>> > Alex.
>> >
>> > On 07/07/07, Simon Kaegi <Simon_Kaegi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > That's great! I've just done a quick sanity check and everything compiles,
>> > > starts and is ready to try out.
>> > >  Thanks.
>> > >
>> > > For anyone wanting to take a look, the following new projects were added to
>> > > the incubator.
>> > >
>> > > 1) org.eclipse.equinox.ds
>> > > 2) org.eclipse.equinox.io
>> > > 3) org.eclipse.equinox.ip
>> > > 4) org.eclipse.equinox.util
>> > > 5) org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin
>> > >
>> > > I had one cosmetic question for equinox.util. Currently the BSN is
>> > > "org.eclipse.equinox.util.putifull" -- is there some reason it's not just
>> > > org.eclipse.equinox.util?
>> > > -Simon
>> > >
>> > > equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 07/07/2007 06:41:23 AM:
>> > >
>> > > > In CVS under your proposed naming.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Pavlin
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > OK, I'm not particular about the names right now.  Since we already
>> > > > have a DS bundle lets just use org.eclipse.equinox.ds for
>> > > > declarative services.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also like org.eclipse.equinox.ip for initial provisioning but
>> > > > thought it might be to short :)  but it is snappy.
>> > > >
>> > > > Pavlin, if these are ok with you please release with the names org.
>> > > > eclipse.equinox.ds and org.eclipse.equinox.ip.  As I said before it
>> > > > is no big deal to rename the bundles if needed in the incubator later.
>> > > >
>> > > > Tom
>> > > >
>> > > > Chris Aniszczyk/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
>> > > > Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > 07/05/2007 09:34 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > Please respond to
>> > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > To
>> > > >
>> > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > cc
>> > > >
>> > > > Subject
>> > > >
>> > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions
>> > > >
>> > > > as an outsider, +1 for DS instead of SCR, there's like 5 people that
>> > > > would get the SCR reference :)
>> > > >
>> > > > initialprovisioning is really long....
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers,
>> > > >
>> > > > ---
>> > > > Chris Aniszczyk | IBM Lotus | Eclipse Committer | http://mea-bloga.
>> > > > blogspot.com | +1.860.839.2465
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed] Jeff McAffer ---07/05/2007 09:13:02 PM---I agree
>> > > > with all/most Tom said. In the end we should look to have just one
>> > > > DS implementation, Ultimately I suggest that it be
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > From:
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > To:
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > Date:
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > 07/05/2007 09:13 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > Subject:
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions
>> > > >
>> > > > I agree with all/most Tom said. In the end we should look to have
>> > > > just one DS implementation, Ultimately I suggest that it be called
>> > > > o.e.e.ds. Never did like "scr". I'm a little bummed by o.e.e.
>> > > > initialprovisioning. o.e.e.ip is snappier and I doubt that anyone
>> > > > would get confused with Intelectual property, or Internet Protocol
>> > > > or, ... In any event, it is a mild dislike so...
>> > > >
>> > > > Lets get the code in the incubator and move forward.
>> > > >
>> > > > Jeff
>> > > >
>> > > > Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > > Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > 07/05/2007 03:51 PM
>> > > >
>> > > > Please respond to
>> > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > To
>> > > >
>> > > > Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >
>> > > > cc
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > >
>> > > > Subject
>> > > >
>> > > > Re: [equinox-dev] Prosyst contributions
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > >
>> > > > [image removed]
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi Simon,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I can commit the sources in the CVS. Here are the open issues
>> > > > > that should be resolved prior moving code to the CVS.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 1. Naming.
>> > > > > Following the discussion the last proposed naming is:
>> > > > > 1.1 org.eclipse.equionx.initialprovisioning
>> > > > > other suggestion: org.eclipse.equionx.ip
>> > > >
>> > > > +1 for org.eclipse.equinox.initialprovisioning
>> > > >
>> > > > I think this name will reduce an confusion with the
>> > > > rest of the equinox provisioning work.
>> > > >
>> > > > > 1.2 org.eclipse.equionx.ds
>> > > > > other suggestion: org.eclipse.equionx.scr
>> > > >
>> > > > +1 for org.eclipse.equinox.scr
>> > > >
>> > > > > 1.3 org.eclipse.equinox.io
>> > > > > 1.4 org.eclipse.equinox.util
>> > > > > 1.5 org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 2. Replacing. If we use the names org.eclipse.equinox.wireadmin and
>> > > > > org.eclipse.equionx.ds they collide with the current one. Can we
>> > > replace
>> > > > > the code in the CVS at this stage directly or temporary other names
>> > > > > will be used?
>> > > >
>> > > > There is no problem replacing the current implementations in the
>> > > > incubator.  To be clear this is under the equinox-incubator directory
>> > > > at dev.eclipse.org:/cvsroot/eclipse.  At this point I suggest we
>> > > > get the initial code released in the incubator.  It is likely that
>> > > > a number of refactorings are going be needed to follow other
>> > > > eclipse coding practices (i.e. using "internal" package names etc.).
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm not fussed on getting all the names correct initially.  We
>> > > > can easily rename them if needed in the incubator.
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 3. javax.microedition.io package
>> > > > > Now it is in Connector services implementation. This is not a good
>> > > > > choice because it is needed only on Java SE VMs. J2ME VMs
>> > > > > contains that package. In our equinox distribution it is a fragment of
>> > > > > the system bundle that is installed only on Java SE VMs.
>> > > > > But initially we can put it inside the connector implementation.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > -Pavlin
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I think we should consider separating this out into another bundle and
>> > > > import the packages from org.eclipse.equinox.io (but we can do this
>> > > later).
>> > > > I'm not sure why it has to be a system bundle fragment.  I think we
>> > > should
>> > > > make it a normal bundle (called javax.microedition.io?).
>> > > >
>> > > > Tom _______________________________________________
>> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > equinox-dev mailing list
>> > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> equinox-dev mailing list
>> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>>
AB> _______________________________________________
AB> equinox-dev mailing list
AB> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
AB> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev