You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cayenne.apache.org by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> on 2008/12/20 12:51:28 UTC
access.reveng package
I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff,
"access.reveng", should either be renamed or moved to some existing
package. Two reasons:
* Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with "reverse
engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other
classes located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other
things, e.g. creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
* Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of
that in the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
Not completely sure where it would fit though.
"org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
Andrus
Re: access.reveng package
Posted by Michael Gentry <bl...@gmail.com>.
Or "Access Revenge" ... like planting a backdoor.
I agree with Andrus/Ari. No harm in making the change, just add it to
the release notes.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to mention that "reveng" looks like "revenge" in English.
> At first I thought someone was making a joke :-)
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 6:51 AM, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
>> I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff, "access.reveng",
>> should either be renamed or moved to some existing package. Two reasons:
>>
>> * Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with "reverse
>> engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other classes
>> located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other things, e.g.
>> creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
>>
>> * Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of that in
>> the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
>>
>> Not completely sure where it would fit though.
>> "org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>
Re: access.reveng package
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
Not to mention that "reveng" looks like "revenge" in English.
At first I thought someone was making a joke :-)
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 6:51 AM, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff, "access.reveng",
> should either be renamed or moved to some existing package. Two reasons:
>
> * Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with "reverse
> engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other classes
> located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other things, e.g.
> creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
>
> * Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of that in
> the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
>
> Not completely sure where it would fit though.
> "org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
>
> Andrus
>
Re: access.reveng package
Posted by Aristedes Maniatis <ar...@ish.com.au>.
On 20/12/2008, at 11:14 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
> While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should
> know that
> this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can
> cause
> potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
> "reveng-classes".
Andrey, I think the only things you should do now are:
* create a Jira task with a short explanation of what was done
* add to the RELEASE NOTES something like:
API changes since M4:
* access.reveng package has been renamed map.access
Otherwise I agree that the only reason M5 wasn't called 3.0.5 is that
there still remains greater flexibility to break backward
compatibility. Which is why before we release 3.0, the whole
generifying query discussion needs to be revisited...
Ari
-------------------------->
ish
http://www.ish.com.au
Level 1, 30 Wilson Street Newtown 2042 Australia
phone +61 2 9550 5001 fax +61 2 9550 4001
GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
Re: access.reveng package
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
> While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should
> know that
> this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can
> cause
> potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
> "reveng-classes".
We may go through a deprecation, but we don't have to. The promise
about API stability that we give to our users is that *stable* API
will be modified as gently as possible. Milestone releases are
considered alpha and give us the freedom to modify newly introduced
API's at will.
> I feel that such decisions should be made in a consensus, but
> usually I get
> little feedback with that..
Absolutely. In fact what's at work here is "lazy consensus". If you
suggest something and get no relevant feedback, you are absolutely
within your rights as a committer to proceed with your initial idea.
Andrus
On Dec 20, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
> Hi Andrus,
>
> While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should
> know that
> this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can
> cause
> potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
> "reveng-classes".
>
> I feel that such decisions should be made in a consensus, but
> usually I get
> little feedback with that..
>
> 2008/12/20 Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>
>
>> I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff,
>> "access.reveng",
>> should either be renamed or moved to some existing package. Two
>> reasons:
>>
>> * Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with
>> "reverse
>> engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other
>> classes
>> located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other things, e.g.
>> creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
>>
>> * Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of
>> that in
>> the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
>>
>> Not completely sure where it would fit though.
>> "org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
>>
>> Andrus
>>
Re: access.reveng package
Posted by Andrey Razumovsky <ra...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrus,
While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should know that
this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can cause
potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
"reveng-classes".
I feel that such decisions should be made in a consensus, but usually I get
little feedback with that..
2008/12/20 Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>
> I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff, "access.reveng",
> should either be renamed or moved to some existing package. Two reasons:
>
> * Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with "reverse
> engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other classes
> located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other things, e.g.
> creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
>
> * Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of that in
> the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
>
> Not completely sure where it would fit though.
> "org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
>
> Andrus
>