Re: access.reveng package

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Sat Dec 20 2008 - 07:25:36 EST

  • Next message: Aristedes Maniatis: "Re: access.reveng package"

    > While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should
    > know that
    > this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can
    > cause
    > potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
    > "reveng-classes".

    We may go through a deprecation, but we don't have to. The promise
    about API stability that we give to our users is that *stable* API
    will be modified as gently as possible. Milestone releases are
    considered alpha and give us the freedom to modify newly introduced
    API's at will.

    > I feel that such decisions should be made in a consensus, but
    > usually I get
    > little feedback with that..

    Absolutely. In fact what's at work here is "lazy consensus". If you
    suggest something and get no relevant feedback, you are absolutely
    within your rights as a committer to proceed with your initial idea.

    Andrus

    On Dec 20, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:

    > Hi Andrus,
    >
    > While I have no objections to this renaming in general, you should
    > know that
    > this package was already distributed in M5. So this renaming can
    > cause
    > potential compilation problems unless we keep old deprecated
    > "reveng-classes".
    >
    > I feel that such decisions should be made in a consensus, but
    > usually I get
    > little feedback with that..
    >
    > 2008/12/20 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>
    >
    >> I am feeling like the package for the new naming stuff,
    >> "access.reveng",
    >> should either be renamed or moved to some existing package. Two
    >> reasons:
    >>
    >> * Classes and interfaces there by themselves do not deal with
    >> "reverse
    >> engineering". They are used during reverse engineering by other
    >> classes
    >> located elsewhere (and can potentially be used for other things, e.g.
    >> creating an ObjEntity in the Modeler from a DbEntity.
    >>
    >> * Don't like using an abbreviation ("reveng"). We've been guilty of
    >> that in
    >> the past (ObjEntity), but now trying to stay away from abbrevs.
    >>
    >> Not completely sure where it would fit though.
    >> "org.apache.cayenne.map.naming" maybe?
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Dec 20 2008 - 07:26:16 EST