You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jena.apache.org by "Andy Seaborne (Created) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2012/01/10 12:22:39 UTC
[jira] [Created] (JENA-192) Jena java package renaming.
Jena java package renaming.
---------------------------
Key: JENA-192
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192
Project: Jena
Issue Type: Brainstorming
Components: Jena
Reporter: Andy Seaborne
This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
The maven artuifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-192) Jena java package renaming.
Posted by "Andy Seaborne (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13260704#comment-13260704 ]
Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-192:
------------------------------------
I'm currently in favour of cloning the API, that is having com.hp.hpl.jena.* (c.h.h.j) and also org.apache.jena.* (o.a.j).
We leave c.h.h.j alone (complete compatibility) and making improvements to o.a.j.
This creates space for change and feedback from users in a way just branching does not. This is a long, slow process, not a one-time introduction of a new API.
And a scala one?
And a clojure one?
We can then think about move c.h.h.j to a compatibility module but decide based on how it goes.
> Jena java package renaming.
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-192
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Brainstorming
> Components: Jena
> Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>
> This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
> What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
> com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
> The maven artifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
> See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-192) Jena java package renaming.
Posted by "Andy Seaborne (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13260804#comment-13260804 ]
Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-192:
------------------------------------
Yes - it would/could be a separate jar. (Last line of my comment - wasn't very clear)
The point about same name classes is very important and suggests to me splitting sooner, or even immediately. (and, yes, one of the internal classes I want to rename is "Query")
We still need to provide compatibility to keep our own support costs down.
Maybe the best way is:
1/ Move chhj-api into it's own module ASAP.
This is still included as standard in all builds.
2/ Start with oaj-api by copy/rename of chhj and start evolving it there.
People can choose which to use by switching jar.
The normal dependency is at this point the chhj API.
3/ Release the oaj API
People can use by excluding chhj and including oaj.
4/ See how things are going and decide how quickly to deprecate chhj.
I'm looking for a migration path that does not have points where things are "in flux" to the point where a relase for bug fixes or just general maintainence can't be done.
> Jena java package renaming.
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-192
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Brainstorming
> Components: Jena
> Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>
> This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
> What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
> com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
> The maven artifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
> See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-192) Jena java package renaming.
Posted by "Stephen Allen (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13260734#comment-13260734 ]
Stephen Allen commented on JENA-192:
------------------------------------
Moving this from email list to JIRA:
Would it be possible to have the c.h.h.j.* classes living in a separate optional compatibility jar? It would be nice to be able to remove it if you've switched fully to the new API. Would this be harder than having them in the same jar?
One thought is new user confusion when their Eclipse autocomplete brings up two copies of every class.
> Jena java package renaming.
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-192
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Brainstorming
> Components: Jena
> Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>
> This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
> What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
> com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
> The maven artifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
> See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Updated] (JENA-192) Jena java package renaming.
Posted by "Andy Seaborne (Updated) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Andy Seaborne updated JENA-192:
-------------------------------
Description:
This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
The maven artifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
was:
This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
The maven artuifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
> Jena java package renaming.
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-192
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-192
> Project: Jena
> Issue Type: Brainstorming
> Components: Jena
> Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>
> This JIRA is for discussion of renaming the package structure.
> What are the pros and cons of renaming the java packaging:
> com.hp.hpl.jena => org.apache.jena?
> The maven artifacts are already "org.apache.jena:jena-ABC"
> See also JENA-190 (delivery) and JENA-191 (modules and build)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira