Re: [sca-j] ISSUE-28: Package Name Changes

[Simon Nash <NASH@uk.ibm.com>]

Roberto,
I understand the algorithm that led
to this name being proposed.  Unfortunately, the result isn't a good
one from a usability perspective.  It seems we are agreed that it
is annoying, but perhaps with different views on how much of an issue that
is.  This package name is very much in the face of anyone doing SCA
programming in Java, and I think we should try to avoid putting annoyances
(even minor ones) on that learning path.

I checked domain availability for a
couple of other posible names.  Both oasisj.org and oasisjava.org
are currently available.  I think either of these would be better
alternatives.

The other issue is whether we need a
new package name.  We still don't know whether, or to what extent,
the OASIS APIs will be different from or incompatible with the OSOA ones.
 It seems that Mary has made an assumption of incompatibility without
consulting the TC.

    Simon

Simon C. Nash, IBM Distinguished Engineer
Member of the IBM Academy of Technology
Tel. +44-1962-815156  Fax +44-1962-818999

Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
Sent by: Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM

09/04/2008 17:33

To	Simon Nash/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc	sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject	Re: [sca-j] ISSUE-28: Package Name Changes

Simon,

I believe that the "org.oasis_open" package name is the result
of 
applying the convention suggested in the Java Language Specification 
(Third Edition, section 7.7) to the "oasis-open.org" domain name.
So at 
least it's not completely arbitrary.

I too think that it'd be better if OASIS owned a domain name that 
resulted in a more conventional Java package name.

On the other hand, given the widespread use of IDEs, I don't see the 
proposed package name as being more than mildly annoying.

--Roberto

Simon Nash wrote:
> I'm not very happy with the decision that Mary sent out.  The
package 
> prefix she is suggesting seems very cumbersome and contrary to normal
Java 
> naming conventions.  We'll all have to get used to saying "org
dot oasis 
> underscore open dot sca dot ComponentContext" (etc.).
>
> It's the cumbersome and unconventional new package name prefix that
is the 
> main issue from my perspective.  The change from osoa could be
argued 
> either way, depending on how much change we make to the details of
the 
> APIs.
>
>     Simon
>
> Simon C. Nash, IBM Distinguished Engineer
> Member of the IBM Academy of Technology
> Tel. +44-1962-815156  Fax +44-1962-818999
>
>
>
> "Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com> 
> 28/02/2008 13:41
>
> To
> "Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>, <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> [sca-j] ISSUE-28: Package Name Changes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-28
>
> Von: Patil, Sanjay [mailto:sanjay.patil@sap.com] 
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2008 19:50
> An: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
> Betreff: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Package Name Changes
>
>
> RAISER: Sanjay Patil 
> TARGET: Java Common Annotations and APIs Specification 
> DESCRIPTION: 
> The Java Common Annotations and APIs Specification uses the 'org.osoa.sca'
> package name for the API and 'org.osoa.sca.annotations' package name
for 
> the annotations. There exist a good number of commercial and open
source 
> software implementations of SCA that use the current package names.
It 
> will be painful for these implementations to maintain backward 
> compatibility if the package names in the final version of the 
> specifications are going to be  different from the current package
names.
> It is not clear whether the OASIS SCA-J TC would bless use of the
current 
> package names in the final versions of the specifications or not.
> PROPOSAL: 
> Continue to use the current package names (org.osoa.sca, 
> org.osoa.sca.annotations) in the final specifications. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
number 
> 741598. 
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU