On 05.03.2004 19:49, Tim Larson wrote:
Package: org.apache.cocoon.cforms
here I would go "forms" instead. package naming is where the estate really is, where class collissions might happen.
I understand how this seems like a good place for the battleground, but to introduce a new winner it looks like this would force us to break code compiled against the previous major version because we would be stealing the class and interface names for the new version. Does the new block system somehow solve this problem like via classloaders or something else?
This was exactly the reason I liked the cforms in the package name more than just forms. BTW, why plural (c)forms instead of singular (c)form?
NOTE: the name "cforms" or "forms" doesn't make any different in the previous versioning scenario.
It's a completely unrelated problem and having a more distinctive name (cforms) is not going to help since the problem emerges violently already when you have two different versions of the same block installed in a single cocoon instance.
-- Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
