brett.mclaughlin at lutris.com
Wed Jun 21 14:53:40 PDT 2000
Alex Chaffee wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 12:10:46PM -0700, Jason Hunter wrote:
> > Looks slick, Alex. I'll be happy to put it in the contrib directory.
> > Could you please complete the Javadoc comments (including adding the
> > usage to the class Javadoc entry), put it under our standard license,
> > and send it to me?
> OK. I'll do that soon.
> Any opinions on whether I should rename it to, say, "JDOMCacheBean" or
I think JDOMBean is OK for now, but I'm not sold on it, so if you want
to change, now is the time ;-)
> > The package org.jdom.contrib.jsp sounds like a good
> > place to put it. (I'll move the other contribs under org.jdom.contrib
> > as well.)
> It's up to you, but since it's not JSP-specific -- you can use it in
> servlets, applications, or from other beans in your favorite bean IDE
> -- I'd prefer it just go in org.jdom.contrib. It's not what you'd
> call cluttered yet, and organizationally, I prefer a big heap of
> classes that have one thing in common (contrib = they were
> contributed), instead of a pre-hoc, arbitrary set of sub-package names
> that I'd have to root around in to find the file I want.
Actually, I don't think things should be in the org.jdom.contrib
package. That's not the intention there. We have three core
org.jdom.* [Core classes]
org.jdom.examples [Example uses of the core]
org.jdom.tests [Test suite]
Those are spread out into samples, contrib, and the main branch.
contrib is a testing ground, that in essence will determine if something
goes into the core, or stays in, for example, org.jdom.util. So things
in contrib should be in the package where they would reside if accepted,
like org.jdom.util for your class, or even org.jdom.output. There
shouldn't be an org.jdom.contrib package, because that doesn't mean
anything to me or anyone else. Everything was contributed... why a
package for some of it?
> For instance, the current division between "examples" and "output"
> makes absolutely no sense if I'm looking for JTree code, especially
> because the arbitrary division of "examples" from "output" separates
> the two source files having to do with JTree!
I totally disagree. JTreeOutputter performs output. JTreeOutputterDemo
shows how to use it. Everyone that does output with JTree needs
org.jdom.output.JTreeOutputter. Nobody that does output with JTree
should use JTreeOutputterDemo except as an ... well ... example.
Additionally, the distribution jar shouldn't include examples, it should
include core. That split makes lots of sense to me, as I know where is
core, and where are "use-cases" to show how core works.
> If someone contributes a set of classes that compose a discrete
> project, then they can get a subpackage (so I'd consider making
> org.jdom.contrib.jtree to house the "JTree" project containing
> JTreeOutputter.java and JtreeOutputterDemo.java).
We classify not by type, but by purpose. Most complete "sub-projects"
will actually span org.jdom.input, org.jdom.output, and org.jdom
(possibly). We divide the whole project among input/use/output, so I
think that's sound. We may eventually add org.jdom.process, but we'll
> And if and when a contributed project becomes core, it could then be
> cleanly re-integrated into the core package hierarchy.
Yeah, this is why I don't like contrib in the package name - it should
be a lateral move, not a package change.
> > I'm thinking it might be smart to make a jdom-contrib module with write
> > access for people involved in contributed projects. We're already
> > planning a jdom-test module to host the testing effort. Any opinions?
> Do you mean a separate set of users/permissions? Again, why
> overcomplicate? Committers should, by definition, be responsible
> enough not to check in code where it doesn't belong.
Jason is trying to get at letting people commit to contrib but not the
core, which I think is a good idea (although not one I support ;-) ). I
think contrib is sort of (excuse the reference) JDOM purgatory, and
since we (committers to the core) decide what gets sent there (again,
excuse the extended religious metaphor here!), then we need to be doing
those commits. Eventually, if people are making contribs that go core,
they would get core commit access (IMO).
> Alex Chaffee mailto:alex at jguru.com
> jGuru - Java News and FAQs http://www.jguru.com/alex/
> Creator of Gamelan http://www.gamelan.com/
> Founder of Purple Technology http://www.purpletech.com/
> Curator of Stinky Art Collective http://www.stinky.com/
> To control your jdom-interest membership:
Brett McLaughlin, Enhydra Strategist
Lutris Technologies, Inc.
1200 Pacific Avenue, Suite 300
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA
More information about the jdom-interest