You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commons-dev@ws.apache.org by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> on 2006/04/24 19:15:40 UTC
OMNamespace
Looking at OMNamespace...
Um... "getName()"??
Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
Can we refactor this before the next release please?
--Glen
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>.
+1 not to change at this point :)
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>Yes please. Let's leave it alone.
>
>-- dims
>
>On 4/27/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
>
>
>>Unfortunately, now I have to twist this a bit.
>>
>>I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
>>addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
>>Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
>>in the current stage.
>>
>>Considering the amount of work we have and the criticality of this
>>compared others shall we leave this as it is, please ? A humble request
>>from a poor developer :).
>>
>>Anyway, its just another name change. Axis2 and Axiom will function very
>>well with or without that change.
>>
>>-- Chinthaka
>>
>>Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:37 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Personally, I agree with Ruchith and think that interface renames like
>>>>this should happen before 1.0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I'm not going to get in the way with this change .. but if we are going
>>>to change it it must be done now and not later!
>>>
>>>So, +1 for whatever appears to be the winning name ;-).
>>>
>>>Sanjiva.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
>
>
>
--
Thanks,
Deepal
................................................................
~Future is Open~
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Yes please. Let's leave it alone.
-- dims
On 4/27/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Unfortunately, now I have to twist this a bit.
>
> I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
> addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
> Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
> in the current stage.
>
> Considering the amount of work we have and the criticality of this
> compared others shall we leave this as it is, please ? A humble request
> from a poor developer :).
>
> Anyway, its just another name change. Axis2 and Axiom will function very
> well with or without that change.
>
> -- Chinthaka
>
> Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:37 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote:
> >> Personally, I agree with Ruchith and think that interface renames like
> >> this should happen before 1.0.
> >
> > I'm not going to get in the way with this change .. but if we are going
> > to change it it must be done now and not later!
> >
> > So, +1 for whatever appears to be the winning name ;-).
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Ruchith Fernando <ru...@gmail.com>.
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WSCOMMONS-16
Now we will not forget/drop it :)
+1 to do this later...
Thanks,
Ruchith
On 4/27/06, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > There's tons of stuff to do and so little time, can we please defer it
> > as per others feelings?
>
> Of course. As long as it's "defer" and not "drop"....
>
> --G
>
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> There's tons of stuff to do and so little time, can we please defer it
> as per others feelings?
Of course. As long as it's "defer" and not "drop"....
--G
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>Glen,
>
>There's tons of stuff to do and so little time, can we please defer it
>as per others feelings?
>
>thanks,
>dims
>
>On 4/27/06, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Eran Chinthaka wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
>>>addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
>>>Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
>>>in the current stage.
>>>
>>>
>>a) This kind of refactor doesn't change functionality at all - therefore
>>it's a much less intrusive/worrysome change than some kind of behavioral
>>thing which might actually affect the operation of dependent code (this
>>is just a simple rename/recompile). What's the worry?
>>
>>b) It is much better to change this stuff before 1.0. Yes, we'll do
>>stuff like this after 1.0 but it'll be a bit more of a pain, so I'd
>>rather get it out of the way.
>>
>>c) 83 files across four projects really isn't that many (were you really
>>surprised by that number?), and the tools make this kind of thing easy.
>>
>>I would much rather do this change now. The only valid concern I can
>>see is worrying about other people's code which might already depend on
>>this API. If we're really concerned about that (I don't think it's a
>>big deal before 1.0), we could deprecate getName() and still change all
>>the Apache code to use getURI()/getNamespaceURI() - then get rid of it
>>in 1.1 or 1.2.
>>
>>I'll certainly live with it if everyone else feels we should leave it, I
>>just hope that this isn't a trend towards locking down these APIs
>>forever... I guarantee we didn't get everything right the first time
>>around and would like to be able to fix things. :) My apologies, by the
>>way, if I come across as cranky about this stuff - I don't intend to, I
>>just want things to be as good/easy/clean as they can be.
>>
>>--Glen
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
>
>
>
+1 to defer this
--
Thanks,
Deepal
................................................................
~Future is Open~
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Glen,
There's tons of stuff to do and so little time, can we please defer it
as per others feelings?
thanks,
dims
On 4/27/06, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> Eran Chinthaka wrote:
> > I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
> > addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
> > Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
> > in the current stage.
>
> a) This kind of refactor doesn't change functionality at all - therefore
> it's a much less intrusive/worrysome change than some kind of behavioral
> thing which might actually affect the operation of dependent code (this
> is just a simple rename/recompile). What's the worry?
>
> b) It is much better to change this stuff before 1.0. Yes, we'll do
> stuff like this after 1.0 but it'll be a bit more of a pain, so I'd
> rather get it out of the way.
>
> c) 83 files across four projects really isn't that many (were you really
> surprised by that number?), and the tools make this kind of thing easy.
>
> I would much rather do this change now. The only valid concern I can
> see is worrying about other people's code which might already depend on
> this API. If we're really concerned about that (I don't think it's a
> big deal before 1.0), we could deprecate getName() and still change all
> the Apache code to use getURI()/getNamespaceURI() - then get rid of it
> in 1.1 or 1.2.
>
> I'll certainly live with it if everyone else feels we should leave it, I
> just hope that this isn't a trend towards locking down these APIs
> forever... I guarantee we didn't get everything right the first time
> around and would like to be able to fix things. :) My apologies, by the
> way, if I come across as cranky about this stuff - I don't intend to, I
> just want things to be as good/easy/clean as they can be.
>
> --Glen
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.
Eran Chinthaka wrote:
> I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
> addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
> Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
> in the current stage.
a) This kind of refactor doesn't change functionality at all - therefore
it's a much less intrusive/worrysome change than some kind of behavioral
thing which might actually affect the operation of dependent code (this
is just a simple rename/recompile). What's the worry?
b) It is much better to change this stuff before 1.0. Yes, we'll do
stuff like this after 1.0 but it'll be a bit more of a pain, so I'd
rather get it out of the way.
c) 83 files across four projects really isn't that many (were you really
surprised by that number?), and the tools make this kind of thing easy.
I would much rather do this change now. The only valid concern I can
see is worrying about other people's code which might already depend on
this API. If we're really concerned about that (I don't think it's a
big deal before 1.0), we could deprecate getName() and still change all
the Apache code to use getURI()/getNamespaceURI() - then get rid of it
in 1.1 or 1.2.
I'll certainly live with it if everyone else feels we should leave it, I
just hope that this isn't a trend towards locking down these APIs
forever... I guarantee we didn't get everything right the first time
around and would like to be able to fix things. :) My apologies, by the
way, if I come across as cranky about this stuff - I don't intend to, I
just want things to be as good/easy/clean as they can be.
--Glen
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk>.
Unfortunately, now I have to twist this a bit.
I tried to do this with Sandesha2, Policy and Axis2 in the project, in
addition to Axiom. I found that this will change 242 places in 83 files.
Doing this kind of non-critical refactoring is not that good, at least
in the current stage.
Considering the amount of work we have and the criticality of this
compared others shall we leave this as it is, please ? A humble request
from a poor developer :).
Anyway, its just another name change. Axis2 and Axiom will function very
well with or without that change.
-- Chinthaka
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:37 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote:
>> Personally, I agree with Ruchith and think that interface renames like
>> this should happen before 1.0.
>
> I'm not going to get in the way with this change .. but if we are going
> to change it it must be done now and not later!
>
> So, +1 for whatever appears to be the winning name ;-).
>
> Sanjiva.
>
>
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:37 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote:
>
> Personally, I agree with Ruchith and think that interface renames like
> this should happen before 1.0.
I'm not going to get in the way with this change .. but if we are going
to change it it must be done now and not later!
So, +1 for whatever appears to be the winning name ;-).
Sanjiva.
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.
Hi Sanjiva, all:
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> +1 .. plus, IMO OMNamespace.getName() is in fact the right name .. the
> namespace URI is called the namespace name isn't it??
That's a terrible spec-ese term, though. It's like SOAP header vs. SOAP
header block - everyone calls individual headers "SOAP headers".
Everyone calls namespaces either "namespaces" or "namespace URIs".
> namespaceURI() was/is the right name when you ask someone else (like an
> element) for its NSURI, but when you're talking to the OMNamespace node
> what we have now seems ok to me.
I think that's a stretch. :) To me, getName() says "get a
javax.xml.soap.Name", or "get a simple string name for this object",
neither of which feels right here.
Really, getNamespaceName() would even be better. getNamespace() is also
fine, although since we're in an OMNamespace object that feels a little
weird to me. getNamespaceURI() matches QName, OMElement, MessageElement
from Axis1, NamespaceContext, SOAPElement from SAAJ, etc... that would
be my preference.
Personally, I agree with Ruchith and think that interface renames like
this should happen before 1.0.
--Glen
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@opensource.lk>.
+1 .. plus, IMO OMNamespace.getName() is in fact the right name .. the
namespace URI is called the namespace name isn't it??
namespaceURI() was/is the right name when you ask someone else (like an
element) for its NSURI, but when you're talking to the OMNamespace node
what we have now seems ok to me.
Sanjiva.
On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 02:08 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> We have to stop sometime...am sure if we look a bit more, we will find
> a bunch of more changes. anyway that is my 2 cents.
>
> -- dims
>
> On 4/26/06, Ruchith Fernando <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > hmm... since this is an interface change ... isn't it better to do it
> > before 1.0 ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ruchith
> >
> > On 4/26/06, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Let's leave it alone for now..let's collect these suggestions
> > > somewhere and use that later.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > dims
> > >
> > > On 4/26/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> > > > Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
> > > > OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
> > > >
> > > > -- Chinthaka
> > > >
> > > > Glen Daniels wrote:
> > > > > Looking at OMNamespace...
> > > > >
> > > > > Um... "getName()"??
> > > > >
> > > > > Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we refactor this before the next release please?
> > > > >
> > > > > --Glen
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
We have to stop sometime...am sure if we look a bit more, we will find
a bunch of more changes. anyway that is my 2 cents.
-- dims
On 4/26/06, Ruchith Fernando <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hmm... since this is an interface change ... isn't it better to do it
> before 1.0 ?
>
> Thanks,
> Ruchith
>
> On 4/26/06, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Let's leave it alone for now..let's collect these suggestions
> > somewhere and use that later.
> >
> > thanks,
> > dims
> >
> > On 4/26/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> > > Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
> > >
> > > I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
> > > OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
> > >
> > > -- Chinthaka
> > >
> > > Glen Daniels wrote:
> > > > Looking at OMNamespace...
> > > >
> > > > Um... "getName()"??
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
> > > >
> > > > Can we refactor this before the next release please?
> > > >
> > > > --Glen
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
> >
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Ruchith Fernando <ru...@gmail.com>.
hmm... since this is an interface change ... isn't it better to do it
before 1.0 ?
Thanks,
Ruchith
On 4/26/06, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's leave it alone for now..let's collect these suggestions
> somewhere and use that later.
>
> thanks,
> dims
>
> On 4/26/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> > Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
> >
> > I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
> > OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
> >
> > -- Chinthaka
> >
> > Glen Daniels wrote:
> > > Looking at OMNamespace...
> > >
> > > Um... "getName()"??
> > >
> > > Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
> > >
> > > Can we refactor this before the next release please?
> > >
> > > --Glen
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
>
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
Let's leave it alone for now..let's collect these suggestions
somewhere and use that later.
thanks,
dims
On 4/26/06, Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
>
> I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
> OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
>
> -- Chinthaka
>
> Glen Daniels wrote:
> > Looking at OMNamespace...
> >
> > Um... "getName()"??
> >
> > Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
> >
> > Can we refactor this before the next release please?
> >
> > --Glen
> >
>
>
>
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com>.
Hi Chinthaka, all:
Eran Chinthaka wrote:
> Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
+1
> I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
> OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
Sure, getURI() is dandy with me. +1.
--Glen
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Eran Chinthaka <ch...@opensource.lk>.
Can we do this now before Axiom 1.0 and Axis2 1.0 ?
I'd like to have getURI rather than getNamespaceURI as I feel
OMNamespace.getURI is appropriate over OMNamespace.getNamespaceURI.
-- Chinthaka
Glen Daniels wrote:
> Looking at OMNamespace...
>
> Um... "getName()"??
>
> Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
>
> Can we refactor this before the next release please?
>
> --Glen
>
Re: OMNamespace
Posted by Ruchith Fernando <ru...@gmail.com>.
+1
- Ruchith
On 4/24/06, Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> Looking at OMNamespace...
>
> Um... "getName()"??
>
> Shouldn't that be getNamespaceURI() like in pretty much every other API?
>
> Can we refactor this before the next release please?
>
> --Glen
>