On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:44, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > How do we want to assign namespaces to libraries. There is three ways
> > that I can think of off the top of my head;
> > 1. arbitrary names with no order (ie jakarta-commons-jjar)
> > 2. use internal package names or by DNS name separation (ie
> > org.apache.jjar) 3. semantic categorization (ie
> > system-software/updaters/jjar)
> >
> > (1) will mean could easily get collisions
> > (2) means less chance of collision and matches java standards but does
> > not add any semantics
> > (3) while best for the user can be difficult to standardize. ie some
> > people may use desktop/productivity/jword while others may use
> > productivity/suite/jword etc.
>
> The problem is that we ("JJAR admins") don't know the
> libraries/packages, so it's really up to the owners of the packages,
> modulo collisions.
True but if we stick to (2) then we minimize collisions much like java
package collisions are rare. I guess thats where I see the advantage of (2)
--
Cheers,
Pete
*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Common sense is the collection of prejudices |
| acquired by age 18. " -Albert Einstein |
*------------------------------------------------------*
