My goal's to get it done within the next couple of weeks; this wasn't the best timing relative to my work schedule. :(
-- Adam On 4/18/06, John Fallows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/18/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yep, that was the rationale. Though I'd be up for using "adfimpl" > > instead of "adfinternal". I'm a bit fuzzy why we chose > > "internal" over "impl", but I think there were some other > > teams around in Oracle that had a meaning for "impl" that > > didn't jibe with this. > > > Yep, I'd also prefer "impl" over "internal", but either one is okay. > > I'm also not in love with having the bonus "api" package level, which > > is unnecessary with the "adfimpl"/etc. scheme. > > > Agreed. > > BTW, nope, I haven't done the repackaging yet - busy at work, > > and I want to get some branches merged in too before the drop. > > So, this is definitely still an excellent time to talk about packaging! > > > What is the ETA for a code drop to the repository? > > tc, > -john. > > On 4/18/06, John Fallows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 4/18/06, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, John Fallows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Already done the package renaming? > > > > > > If not, what about having one more additional namespace level: > > > > > > org.apache.myfaces.adf.api > > > > > > org.apache.myfaces.adf.internal (or impl? - which sounds more > > common > > > > to > > > > > > me) > > > > > > org.apache.myfaces.adf.build > > > > > > org.apache.myfaces.adf.demo > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this would separate things even more clearly: All ADF > > stuff in > > > > > one > > > > > > "master" package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Understood. However, the downside of this is that the "internal" / > > > > > "impl" > > > > > subpackage would show up during IDE code completion. Branching the > > > > > package > > > > > namespace early between API and impl helps to address this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure I understood. > > > > When I add org.apache.myfaces.adf.api (ie the API jar) to my IDE there > > > > will > > > > be no code completion for internal/impl > > > > (org.apache.myfaces.adf.internalpackage). Right? > > > > > > > > > Yes that is correct. However, if you want to actually run the code, > > you'll > > > need the impl as well. IDEs don't always make a distinction between > > > compilation dependencies and runtime dependencies, so the impl stuff > > tends > > > to end up on the classpath anyway. > > > > > > When users type "org.apache.myfaces.adf." and observe the code > > completion > > > suggestions, it would be preferable if the unsupported impl packages are > > not > > > shown. > > > > > > tc, > > > -john. > > > -- > > > http://apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10044 > > > Author: Pro JSF and Ajax: Building Rich Internet Components, Apress > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > http://apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10044 > Author: Pro JSF and Ajax: Building Rich Internet Components, Apress > >
