I'm with Markus. Personally, I'm kind of shocked this is even under consideration.
"Versioning" your package structure is a band-aid to the real problem, which is people not being able to control their class-loaders. If you deploy your Tapestry 4 app in one WAR and your Tapestry 5 app in another WAR then this should not be an issue. Per the portability section of the JavaEE spec, the classloaders of WARs should be entirely independent. In my mind, the only people this applies to are people who have deviated from the JavaEE spec, and I don't really see why we should make exceptions for them. People commonly have several differing versions of Log4J and XML parsers within their application server, there's no reason to make an exception for Tapestry. -1 for org.tapestry.apache.v5.0.12 -----Original Message----- From: Markus Joschko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 5:20 PM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Instability in Tapestry 5.0.12-SNAPSHOT Looks like I am alone but I don't like the idea of putting version numbers into package names. In the highly unlikely case that there will be a tapestry 6 (not for technical but solely for marketing reasons ;-)) it might confuse developers. Are the classes in tapestry5 still valid or not? Only developers who will run tapestry4 and 5 in one webapplication might have the problem of distinguishing between the packages. I guess that they are the minority and it might be reasonable for them to read the class comments if they are in doubt which package belongs to which tapestry version. so -1 for a tapestry5 or v5. my 2cents, Markus On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Blower, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Massimo Lusetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 19 May 2008 16:02 >> To: Tapestry users >> Subject: Re: Instability in Tapestry 5.0.12-SNAPSHOT >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > The question is: would it have been better to just broadly rename >> > org.apache.tapestry to org.apache.tapestry5? There was quite a bit >> of >> > discussion back on forth among the developers on this one. >> >> I would say yes. >> >> -- >> Massimo >> http://meridio.blogspot.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
