Hi, push to feature branch OLINGO-564 is done (https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=olingo-odata4.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/OLINGO-564 <https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=olingo-odata4.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/OLINGO-564>). If there are no objections I would merge it into master branch (at least tomorrow).
Best regards, Michael > On 28 Apr 2015, at 08:17, Bolz, Michael <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > because there are no additional opinions and proposals I would start with the > renaming on which Ramesh and Christian already agreed. > org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.provider > [*] -> Csdl* (CsdlProperty) > > I give feedback when it is done. > > Best regards, > Michael > >> On 27 Apr 2015, at 15:24, Bolz, Michael <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I also agree with the suggestion for adding a prefix to the classes in the >> package: org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.provider >> But I’am not sure about the “Csdl”. >> However I currently do not have a better proposal. >> Perhaps somebody has a better name. >> >> Another naming issue I see is the prefix “OData" of the classes within the >> “org.apache.olingo.commons.api.domain” package. >> For me it seems that the prefix should be something like “Client” because >> the classes are mainly (only) used in the context of the ODataClient. >> >> Some opinions/suggestions about these points? >> >> A result of the renaming could than look like: >> >> org.apache.olingo.commons.api.data >> No changes; still: * (Property) >> org.apache.olingo.commons.api.domain >> [OData*] -> Client* (ClientProperty) >> org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm >> No changes; still: Edm* (EdmProperty) >> org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.provider >> [*] -> Csdl* (CsdlProperty) >> >> Best regards, Michael >> >> >>> On 27 Apr 2015, at 08:20, Bolz, Michael <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for feedback, I will take a look into your suggestion below and give >>> feedback. >>> If all look good I would do the merge with the master branch today/tomorrow. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Michael >>> >>>> On 24 Apr 2015, at 15:06, Ramesh Reddy <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> looking good so far. How about this suggestion from before, Christian also >>>> seemed to agree with it >>>> >>>> org.apache.ol in go.commons.api.edm.provider ==> objects created dur in g >>>> CSDL document pars in g. "Edm" would have been right prefix for this, s in >>>> ce can not be used how about "Csdl"? They represent objects from this >>>> document. >>>> >>>> After this I will take another look at them, give you feedback. >>>> >>>> Ramesh.. >>>> >> >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
