incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Wiedmann <>
Subject Re: A few questions about a potential entry into the incubator
Date Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:29:12 GMT
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Ross Gardler <> wrote:

> Finally, they have a large number of users and thus changing their java
> package names to org.apache.* will create considerable problems for them.
> They are happy with the package names but want to do it in a managed way
> with plenty of warning for their users.
> Can incubator releases be in package names other than org.apache?

Not only incubator releases have different package names: Take, for
example, the Geronimo specs jar files. [1] In other words, there is no
legal requirement to have package names under org.apache and this is a
SHOULD rule.

My personal opinion is that maintenance releases should be compatible,
thus not change package names. Jar file names (with a -incubator or
-incubating) are another matter: They can easily be renamed, if
someone feels like it. OTOH, if the package names can be choosen (as
opposed to the Geronimo specs files), then the project should change

A good example might be the ActiveMQ project, which entered the
Incubator in 2005. The project continued its 3.2.x line with several
maintenance releases in 2006. At the same time it began to develop its
next major release, the 4.0.x line with the org.apache package name.

In that example, the maintenance releases have been created from the
old, non-Apache infrastructure. But, assuming that there are no legal
blockers for moving the source code of a maintenance version, at least
a snapshot, to (which the project must do anyways in
the medium term), I'd be clearly in favour for releasing from within
the Incubator.



Germanys national anthem is the most boring in the world - how telling!

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message