[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/30/2007 08:08:22 AM:

> Hi all,
> For the org.eclipse.equinox.util bundle:
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=206151
> I have some comments/questions.
> 1. Can I change the name to the "org.eclipse.equinox.internal.util"
> and kept here only the classes that are needed for more than one bundle?

There is no precedence for doing this in Eclipse.  But it does make some
sense to me.  This would make it obvious that the whole bundle is
really just an internal implementation detail.  What do others think?

> 2. Still we will keep the bundle in the equinox distribution or we will
> move the classes to the org.eclipse.equinox.common.jar in the future?

For now I think we should make all the packages internal and use
x-friends where appropriate for the other service bundles.  In the
future it is possible that we could move the packages to common and
make them real API with no "internal" name in the package.  But we
will not do that unless the gain is substantial (i.e. needed by a
large set of clients in the Eclipse community).

> Next week I will work on removing dependencies and some packages from
> the util bundle but I need decision about the packaging and naming
> prior finishing the work.
> -Pavlin

Thanks Pavlin.  For now you should move the packages out
of the equinox.util into other bundles where appropriate and rename
the remaining packages to include "internal" in the name with
x-friends for the bundles that need the package.

A final decision on the symbolic name of the util bundle can
be made after the package restructuring.

equinox-dev mailing list

Reply via email to