I think that the biggest advantage is that somebody using such a package knows where to look. The javadocs become clearer. But I don't really bother for this pakage. If there is a problem and I need to dive in the code i'ts going to be in the implementation anyway.
> Guess I didn't read your posting carefully enough and followed the names > I proposed in my vote. But if I had done that then I might have started > a war with you over that :). > I don't see the extra value of adding such package names. I know they > are frequently used in other mmbase packages, but it only tells that the > next substring in the package is a name for a set of classes which > implement functionality (interfaces). Subpackages are always narrowing > down functionality and implement something from the super. Adding the > long word "implementations" does not make that more explicit. _______________________________________________ Developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
