On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
> Well then, I suppose we could move things like Configurator and > Configuration to the core package and then move all the sub packages under > "internal", but that just seems like a lot of busy work when we could just > as easily declare in a read me that everything in any sub package is > internal. > Fair enough, some package level Javadoc should help there. Gary > > On Aug 16, 2013, at 11:51 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > The way I've seen this done in Java is to use a package called ".spi", the > Service Provider Interface package. Internal stuff is in ".internal" > packages (which Eclipse uses a lot). When you import something from a > ".internal" package, you know you're not on solid ground. I've also seen > ".impl" packages, which IMO is not a good name. I've never seen a .private. > package though. > > Gary > > > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Ralph Goers > <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: > >> I guess what you are after is a way to make clear what are the interfaces >> and classes developers can use when creating their own components. I >> originally planned on those being in the main core package but I clearly >> didn't include everything that could be there. Unfortunately, this is one >> of the things Java isn't particularly good at. I don't know of a good way >> to indicate what is internal vs OK to use other than comments. >> >> Ralph >> >> On Aug 16, 2013, at 11:37 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >> >> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Ralph Goers >> <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: >> >>> Yeah. StrLookup should be moved up to core. >>> >> >> I tried it and feels arbitrary when I look at all the subpackages and >> wonder which of all the other interfaces should also be moved up. >> >> If we had a specific .spi package it might be better, but that does not >> really make sense in the Core module, right? >> >> It seems neat and tidy if an interface foo is in the .foo package. >> >> Gary >> >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Aug 16, 2013, at 10:17 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> >>> > It seems inconsistent to me, but then StrLookup should be moved up to >>> > match the style of the others? >>> > >>> > Gary >>> > >>> > On Aug 16, 2013, at 22:05, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> StrLookup >>> > >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >>> > >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second >> Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> >> >> > > > -- > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second > Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
