[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Naming and Package Name Concerns
|
The community generated 500 some emails on this issue in about seven days. Those emails went directly to the current stakeholders of this effort. If that was not a clear enough message as to what matters and what can be bargained away behind the scenes - without an open dialog with the community at least trying to get buy in, I am afraid this is an effort is in serious peril even before it has a real chance to start.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Thomas Andraschko <tandraschko@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 9/30/17 3:48 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Naming and Package Name Concerns
| However any new specifications (e.g. a Circuit Breaker specification)
would have to use whatever new package naming scheme the community
decides.
Hmpf... It must really say that it would be a shame if a new spec must use e.g. "org.eclipse.ee4j.circuitbreaker".
For me it would be no difference in using "de.someone.circuitbreaker" instead of "org.eclipse.ee4j.circuitbreaker". It feels like it will loose the "de-facto-standard"-feeling.