On Sunday 22 January 2006 21:53, Eelco Hillenius wrote: > The 'coding recomandations' in this respect are debatable. There > have been various discussions about this on TSS, JavaLobby etc, > always resulting in people being pro and anti.
This is not my intention at all. (See last paragraph.) > there are a couple of other succesful projects which > do the same and never had any conflicts due to it. Yes, if you are the only one not following it, of course it doesn't matter. With enough visibility you would also "claim" the space over some other unfortunate soul if there would be a conflict. Naming conflicts as such are a lot more common than you may think, but the 'prefixing' has indeed made this workable. I find Johan's suggestion that OSS projects have some kind of excemption over commercial projects, even more 'disturbing'. Never-the-less, this came up as a reflection over the co-existence of a Wicket 1.x ad 2.x in the same application, would require a package name change (or some serious classloading magic). Nothing to get excited over and jumping up and down ;o) Cheers Niclas ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
