+1 (non binding), as long as you also remove every *Impl (if there is any) and provide a migration path as you previously sketched (Model extends IModel and deprecating IModel).
imho this is a normal step in a project's evolution, you add functionality, the initial design breaks a little, then you do some cleanup (as in url handling refactor), small refactorings like taking out the "I" and so on. You end up with a good design and consistent naming, and then when more functionality is added, it will be easier to do because the code is clean, and the users will also benefit from this. Of course it is not free, but I believe the benefits for devs and users far outweight the cost of minor migrations. Daniel igor.vaynberg wrote: > > is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket > has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this > convention, is it time for a change? > > this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh > aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch. > > -igor > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/taking-the-I-out-of-Interface-tp25723691p25728939.html Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
