very much agreed and I guess if one can show a migration path (as I
have suggested) which doesn't break too much, then I think nobody
should mind renaming the packages.
But with the ASF member hat on I think the package org.apache.*
is something which the ASF should protect, just as the logo and
the brand name itself resp. add a policy to the incubation process
which people have to agree to when entering the incubation phase.
With respect to JSPWiki, we would have an interesting situation: Our
last release, 2.6.0, which is LGPL, is in the "com.ecyrd.jspwiki"
package, and we have dozens and dozens of modules which are depending
on it. In fact, our structure is such that we encourage people do
develop their own plugin modules rather than do anything else. There
are plenty of these contributed at jspwiki.org, and probably a lot
more plugins inside companies which are not available to us.
With 2.8, we are just planning to take the 2.6, and make an
Apachified version of it in the incubation process. No real
functionality change, just minor upgrades and fixes, and get an
Apache-licensed version out as quickly as possible.
WIth 3.0, we are planning to revamp most of the APIs, and we've been
flagging this as a break point.
Now, if we, with 2.8, have to change to org.apache.*, we will
obviously break compatibility with any of the existing plugins. Then
again, with 3.0, we will break it again. This will cause some
ruckus in our developer base, and we'd certainly like to keep the 2.8
as compatible to 3.0 as possible, that is, keep using the
com.ecyrd.jspwiki package throughout the 2.8 phase and move to
org.apache together with the API break in 3.0.
Any advice or policies?
/Janne
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
