You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jclouds.apache.org by Jeremy Daggett <je...@gmail.com> on 2013/11/13 19:52:46 UTC
Apache Package Naming
Hey folks,
I was just creating a package and realized that it might not necessarily be
correct.
What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level Apache
project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the trail
on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
/jd
Re: Apache Package Naming
Posted by Adrian Cole <ad...@gmail.com>.
Oh, I just meant have 2 releases that are healthy at the same time. One
with old package and the other with new (different branches, different
minor nfnums).
Otherwise, I would do it on "real" change like 2.0 as in a new codebase.
This one is my preference, as otherwise the refactoring is more distraction
than productive.
-A
On Nov 13, 2013 2:44 PM, "Ignasi" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we should do the renaming in a major release (2.0), where users may
> expect that many existing code will break. Providing a command/whatever is
> a really nice thimg to send to the ML, but not all users are subscribed, so
> I think it is better to introduce such a breaker change in a major.
>
> Regarding the 2 package thing (if I've understood), I don't see it: how
> long will we keep the two packages? Are we going to request people sending
> PRs to make the contributions in both packages? I don't see it practical.
>
> I.
> El 13/11/2013 22:25, "Adrian Cole" <ad...@gmail.com> escribió:
>
> > My 2p is to release any package rename dist simultaneously with equiv
> > functionality dist on the old package names. That way, folks can do a 2
> > commit conversion, first to whatever is new and second to the new
> packages.
> >
> > I don't have a strong view on whether or not to rename, ^^ in the case it
> > is bound to occur.
> >
> > -A
> > On Nov 13, 2013 12:49 PM, "Andrew Gaul" <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > We should change the names at some point to conform with other Apache
> > > projects. Doing this sooner rather than later will reduce overall
> > > frustration. If we can reduce the user pain to some simple
> > > command-line, e.g.,
> > >
> > > find -name pom.xml -o -name \*.java |
> > > xargs sed -i 's/org.jclouds/org.apache.jclouds/g'
> > >
> > > we should rename the package names for 1.7.0, immediately before rc1.
> I
> > > also want to use an automated path for changing jclouds itself, since
> we
> > > have so many source files and respositories.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 07:45:33PM +0000, Everett Toews wrote:
> > > > I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it
> is
> > > to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
> > > >
> > > > When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang
> > > renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge
> > > backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long
> > as
> > > possible for our users sanity sake.
> > > >
> > > > Everett
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was just creating a package and realized that it might not
> > > necessarily be
> > > > > correct.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level
> > > Apache
> > > > > project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
> > > > >
> > > > > Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze
> the
> > > trail
> > > > > on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > /jd
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Gaul
> > > http://gaul.org/
> > >
> >
>
Re: Apache Package Naming
Posted by Ignasi <ig...@gmail.com>.
I think we should do the renaming in a major release (2.0), where users may
expect that many existing code will break. Providing a command/whatever is
a really nice thimg to send to the ML, but not all users are subscribed, so
I think it is better to introduce such a breaker change in a major.
Regarding the 2 package thing (if I've understood), I don't see it: how
long will we keep the two packages? Are we going to request people sending
PRs to make the contributions in both packages? I don't see it practical.
I.
El 13/11/2013 22:25, "Adrian Cole" <ad...@gmail.com> escribió:
> My 2p is to release any package rename dist simultaneously with equiv
> functionality dist on the old package names. That way, folks can do a 2
> commit conversion, first to whatever is new and second to the new packages.
>
> I don't have a strong view on whether or not to rename, ^^ in the case it
> is bound to occur.
>
> -A
> On Nov 13, 2013 12:49 PM, "Andrew Gaul" <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > We should change the names at some point to conform with other Apache
> > projects. Doing this sooner rather than later will reduce overall
> > frustration. If we can reduce the user pain to some simple
> > command-line, e.g.,
> >
> > find -name pom.xml -o -name \*.java |
> > xargs sed -i 's/org.jclouds/org.apache.jclouds/g'
> >
> > we should rename the package names for 1.7.0, immediately before rc1. I
> > also want to use an automated path for changing jclouds itself, since we
> > have so many source files and respositories.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 07:45:33PM +0000, Everett Toews wrote:
> > > I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it is
> > to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
> > >
> > > When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang
> > renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge
> > backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long
> as
> > possible for our users sanity sake.
> > >
> > > Everett
> > >
> > >
> > > On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey folks,
> > > >
> > > > I was just creating a package and realized that it might not
> > necessarily be
> > > > correct.
> > > >
> > > > What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level
> > Apache
> > > > project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
> > > >
> > > > Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the
> > trail
> > > > on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > /jd
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Gaul
> > http://gaul.org/
> >
>
Re: Apache Package Naming
Posted by Adrian Cole <ad...@gmail.com>.
My 2p is to release any package rename dist simultaneously with equiv
functionality dist on the old package names. That way, folks can do a 2
commit conversion, first to whatever is new and second to the new packages.
I don't have a strong view on whether or not to rename, ^^ in the case it
is bound to occur.
-A
On Nov 13, 2013 12:49 PM, "Andrew Gaul" <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> We should change the names at some point to conform with other Apache
> projects. Doing this sooner rather than later will reduce overall
> frustration. If we can reduce the user pain to some simple
> command-line, e.g.,
>
> find -name pom.xml -o -name \*.java |
> xargs sed -i 's/org.jclouds/org.apache.jclouds/g'
>
> we should rename the package names for 1.7.0, immediately before rc1. I
> also want to use an automated path for changing jclouds itself, since we
> have so many source files and respositories.
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 07:45:33PM +0000, Everett Toews wrote:
> > I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it is
> to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
> >
> > When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang
> renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge
> backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long as
> possible for our users sanity sake.
> >
> > Everett
> >
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote:
> >
> > > Hey folks,
> > >
> > > I was just creating a package and realized that it might not
> necessarily be
> > > correct.
> > >
> > > What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level
> Apache
> > > project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
> > >
> > > Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the
> trail
> > > on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
> > >
> > > /jd
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/
>
Re: Apache Package Naming
Posted by Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>.
We should change the names at some point to conform with other Apache
projects. Doing this sooner rather than later will reduce overall
frustration. If we can reduce the user pain to some simple
command-line, e.g.,
find -name pom.xml -o -name \*.java |
xargs sed -i 's/org.jclouds/org.apache.jclouds/g'
we should rename the package names for 1.7.0, immediately before rc1. I
also want to use an automated path for changing jclouds itself, since we
have so many source files and respositories.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 07:45:33PM +0000, Everett Toews wrote:
> I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it is to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
>
> When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long as possible for our users sanity sake.
>
> Everett
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote:
>
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > I was just creating a package and realized that it might not necessarily be
> > correct.
> >
> > What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level Apache
> > project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
> >
> > Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the trail
> > on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
> >
> > /jd
--
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/
Re: Apache Package Naming
Posted by Everett Toews <ev...@RACKSPACE.COM>.
I'm not aware of any packages with apache in them yet. My take on it is to keep things consistent and *not* name the package with apache.
When (If?) we do the package renaming we should do it as a big bang renaming coinciding with a major version change (2.0?). This is a huge backwards incompatibly and we should keep things consistent for as long as possible for our users sanity sake.
Everett
On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Jeremy Daggett wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I was just creating a package and realized that it might not necessarily be
> correct.
>
> What is our plan on package naming going forward? As a top level Apache
> project, I would expect this to change to "org.apache.jclouds.*".
>
> Most packages are currently under "org.jclouds.*". Should I blaze the trail
> on this and go for the new package name? Thoughts?
>
> /jd