Hi,
On 8/22/06, Jim Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We would like to include the API docs ("specifications" seems to
be a loaded term, with many different definitions and assumptions
tied up in it) in the project.
OK. So the scope of a revised proposal would be broader than just the
implementation of existing standards. I'd be happy with that, and even
with keeping the Jini name based on the expressed views of the Jini
community. The Apache Jini project would be more like the Cocoon or
Lucene (just to name a few) projects that define their own interfaces
than projects like Tomcat or Xerces that implement an externally
defined interface.
* net.jini.* -- this is the primary Jini namespace defined in
the API docs, and chiefly for compatibility reasons with existing
implementations and applications, we can not change this.
I don't see any problem with this.
* com.sun.jini.* -- there are also some compatibility issues
associated with changing this namespace in the implementation,
but we understand the reasons for wanting to change this to
org.apache.<projectname>, and would do this as part of
the incubation phase of the project.
I think it should also be possible to place some compatibility classes
in com.sun.jini.* that can either subclass or act as proxies to the
respective classes in org.apache.<jini>.*.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Software craftsmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
