However we have to be a bit careful when svnmerge from trunk to 1.x if we use a helper etc. as they have different name on trunk
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:49 PM, James Strachan > <james.strac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> One naming convention I really like from the Google Collections >> library is using the plural name of a type/interface/base class as the >> helper class for static helper methods. >> >> So we could rename things like ExchangeHelper to Exchanges, >> CamelContextHelper to CamelContexts. Much neater IMHO. >> >> These helper classes are all internal mostly for Camel implementation >> details; so wondering if it'd make sense to refactor them for 2.0? >> Thoughts? > +1 > > Like java.util.Collections or java.util.Arrays :) > > What about those util classes? > ResolverUtil (I dislike this name, as its not a light weight util class) > > And if we had a StringUtil that many framework have, should it be Strings > And ObjectHelper should be Objects? > > A bit close to Object/String maybe hard to spot. > > >> >> -- >> James >> ------- >> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >> >> Open Source Integration >> http://fusesource.com/ >> > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > Apache Camel Committer > > Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ > -- Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
