You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> on 2008/05/13 02:54:32 UTC
Moving gadgets.http package -> gadgets.servlets
Mostly because gadgets.http makes more sense for the http fetching related
stuff, and to be consistent with other similarly named packages.
Any objections?
Re: Moving gadgets.http package -> gadgets.servlets
Posted by Brian Eaton <be...@google.com>.
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> Nothing has jumped out of the current http directory, but I'd rather use
> gadgets.http for http *fetching*, and gadgets.servlet for the servlets to be
> more consistent with package naming used in other projects.
That sounds like a very reasonable split.
Re: Moving gadgets.http package -> gadgets.servlets
Posted by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>.
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Brian Eaton <be...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> > Mostly because gadgets.http makes more sense for the http fetching
> related
> > stuff, and to be consistent with other similarly named packages.
> >
> > Any objections?
>
> Nit: code already jumps back and forth through those packages like a
> flea on a hot skillet. Why not just flatten them out?
>
Nothing has jumped out of the current http directory, but I'd rather use
gadgets.http for http *fetching*, and gadgets.servlet for the servlets to be
more consistent with package naming used in other projects.
Flattening everything just creates the need for pseudo namespaces, i.e.
prefixing everything.
Re: Moving gadgets.http package -> gadgets.servlets
Posted by Brian Eaton <be...@google.com>.
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> Mostly because gadgets.http makes more sense for the http fetching related
> stuff, and to be consistent with other similarly named packages.
>
> Any objections?
Nit: code already jumps back and forth through those packages like a
flea on a hot skillet. Why not just flatten them out?