You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> on 2009/01/12 23:57:43 UTC
org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Hi,
I'd like to start using org.apache.jcr as the package root and Maven
groupId of the components in the new JCR Commons subproject to clarify
the distinction between "Jackrabbit, the content repository" and the
generic JCR tools we'll have in JCR Commons.
Doing so will require changes to all client code that wants to upgrade
to the latest version, but will also give us a chance to clean up our
APIs and we're in any case labeling the first JCR Commons releases as
2.0.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Alexander Klimetschek <ak...@day.com> wrote:
> Not sure if we'd rather keep the Jackrabbit reference here, since the
> JCR commons is still part of the Jackrabbit project.
There are quite a few subprojects at Apache that have their own
org.apache package name: Solr, Derby, HttpClient, jSieve, etc.
> That would also be backwards-compatible.
Agreed.
> The main indicator would then be the 4th part in the package name,
> not sure if this one is consisten across the components that go into
> jcr commons (that could IMHO be "o.a.jackrabbit.jcr").
If we keep org.apache.jackrabbit as the package root, then I'd rather
not introduce an extra package level. Each JCR Commons component would
just keep it's own reserved package name, like the current
org.apache.jackrabbit.rmi for JCR-RMI.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Alexander Klimetschek <ak...@day.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have a slight preference for this proposal, too. After all, this is
>> Apache Jackrabbit speaking ;-)
>
> Yup, some branding is good!
Besides allowing more granular releases, one key motivation for
proposing the JCR Commons subproject was to make the Jackrabbit
branding clearer and more focused to just the content repository
implementation. See http://markmail.org/message/dmvi7dtjeknkiuzl.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Posted by Alexander Klimetschek <ak...@day.com>.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not sure if we'd rather keep the Jackrabbit reference here, since the
>> JCR commons is still part of the Jackrabbit project. That would also
>> be backwards-compatible. The main indicator would then be the 4th part
>
> While I agree with your fears with respect to backwards compatibility,
> your solution does not help ;-)
>
> The jackrabbit-jcr-commons project lives in the o.a.jackrabbit
> namespace. So regardless of where we "inject" the "jcr" part, we will
> break backwards compatibility, but ...
You are right, once we change something, we break backwards
compatibility. But I was thinking maybe we don't have to in this
case... but as nothing has a "o.a.jackrabbit.jcr" this is thinking is
obsolete ;-)
> I have a slight preference for this proposal, too. After all, this is
> Apache Jackrabbit speaking ;-)
Yup, some branding is good!
Regards,
Alex
--
Alexander Klimetschek
alexander.klimetschek@day.com
Re: org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Alexander Klimetschek schrieb:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'd like to start using org.apache.jcr as the package root and Maven
>> groupId of the components in the new JCR Commons subproject to clarify
>> the distinction between "Jackrabbit, the content repository" and the
>> generic JCR tools we'll have in JCR Commons.
>
> Not sure if we'd rather keep the Jackrabbit reference here, since the
> JCR commons is still part of the Jackrabbit project. That would also
> be backwards-compatible. The main indicator would then be the 4th part
While I agree with your fears with respect to backwards compatibility,
your solution does not help ;-)
The jackrabbit-jcr-commons project lives in the o.a.jackrabbit
namespace. So regardless of where we "inject" the "jcr" part, we will
break backwards compatibility, but ...
Since jackrabbit-jcr-commons (or jcr-commons, right ?) depends on
nothing from Jackrabbit this does not hurt, since bot libraries will
ultimately be able to live side by side because there package-space does
not overlap.
> in the package name, not sure if this one is consisten across the
> components that go into jcr commons (that could IMHO be
> "o.a.jackrabbit.jcr").
I have a slight preference for this proposal, too. After all, this is
Apache Jackrabbit speaking ;-)
Regards
Felix
Re: org.apache.jcr for the JCR Commons subproject
Posted by Alexander Klimetschek <ak...@day.com>.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to start using org.apache.jcr as the package root and Maven
> groupId of the components in the new JCR Commons subproject to clarify
> the distinction between "Jackrabbit, the content repository" and the
> generic JCR tools we'll have in JCR Commons.
Not sure if we'd rather keep the Jackrabbit reference here, since the
JCR commons is still part of the Jackrabbit project. That would also
be backwards-compatible. The main indicator would then be the 4th part
in the package name, not sure if this one is consisten across the
components that go into jcr commons (that could IMHO be
"o.a.jackrabbit.jcr").
Regards,
Alex
--
Alexander Klimetschek
alexander.klimetschek@day.com