> Classes in different frameworks have identical names is widespread. For > example, java nio and netty both have Channel class.
I think it's ok for classes because if you import the class from a wrong package, it's usually a compile time error, but for annotations, it's not the case. Another example is com.google.inject.Inject (in Guice) and javax.inject.Inject, but Guice supports the both annotation classes, meaning it works well event if you import the "wrong" class, but importing the wrong "Service" may be tricky to debug? 在 2019-02-28 23:05:02，"Taosheng, Wei" <[email protected]> 写道： >I think it is not necessary. If a shorter name can express its meaning >clearly, we do not need to make it longer. >Classes in different frameworks have identical names is widespread. For >example, java nio and netty both have Channel class. > > > > >------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ >发件人: "Mercy"<[email protected]>; >发送时间: 2019年2月28日(星期四) 下午5:17 >收件人: "dev"<[email protected]>; >主题: [Discussion] Should we rename the Dubbo's Java anntations with"Dubbo" >prefix? > > > >Hi all, > > > It's an interesting issue[1] that was posted on Dubbo Spring Boot >Project, the reporter ask to rename the Dubbo's Java anntations with >"Dubbo" Prefix: > >Before: > > @Service > > @Reference > >After: > > @DubboService > > @DubboReference > > >I think that's fine, What's your opinion? > > >[1]: >https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo-spring-boot-project/issues/447 > > >Kind regards, > >Mercy Ma
