[news.eclipse.platform.swt] Re: Naming the Eclipse Application Framework

[KC Jones <kc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Thoughts?

Keep it simple.

There is no need for any new names besides SWT and Eclipse.

The fact that most of us developing stand-alone applications
with SWT end up wanting and using JFace is not a reason to
dilute the SWT "brand".  Make no mistake, SWT is a brand and
it does have both strength and value in the "marketplace" of
developer mindshare.  Beware of fiddling with success.

Yes, org.eclipse.swt is a java package and org.eclipse.jface
is not part of that body of code.  But it is a package of
limited interest to application developers without JFace.

You speculate that over time devleopers will want to exploit
more and more Eclipse packages beyond SWT + JFace.  I bet
you're right.  But instead of indicating a need for a new
name, maybe it should be treated as a sign of encapsulation
issues?  Maybe it will just reveal a need to refactor?
Alternatively, there may be other packages (help?) that
emerge as viable component technologies independent of SWT.

But I would caution against diluting the SWT name, and
cautin against lumping other code with SWT unnecessarily.

So I'd respectfully suggest that we use the term SWT to
encompass org.eclipse.swt.** + org.eclipse.jface.**.
Further, I'd suggest that this newsgroup be the home for any
and all queries related to this broader definition of SWT.

Simple.  Clear.  Useful.

Cheers,
KC Jones


PS: This is my third attempt at posting this message.  I can
see no evidence that the others have been posted.  Pardom me
if this is an annoying repreat.]