incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wade Chandler <>
Subject Re: Urgent: Regarding Java package name change to org.apache.*
Date Sat, 05 Aug 2017 01:37:17 GMT
On Aug 4, 2017 10:37, "Andy Seaborne" <> wrote:

On 04/08/17 13:09, Shane Curcuru wrote:

> John D. Ament wrote on 8/4/17 7:59 AM:
>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:17 AM Shane Curcuru <>
>> wrote:
> ...snip...
>> - Other reverse domain names *really* should change to org.apache;
>>> otherwise it's just confusing.
>>> Agreed.  The one caveat to all this is the implementation of javax.
>> namespace which is typically required and managed by the Geronimo TLP
>> (typically).
> ...snip...
> Good point - any package names where there's a well-known technical
> standard that specifies package names takes precedence for naming.
> That's what a normal user would expect, and they also (typically)
> understand there's a difference between the standard API names and the
> actual implementation of the API they've downloaded.
We seem to have lost the community impact.  Projects with a existing
pre-ASF history can have a halo of support in tutorials, books, etc (not
from the donating corp) that all contribute to the success of a project.

The principle that the project outputs come from Apache can be achieved in
various ways.  State the principle not the mechanism.

I agree with this. The move to Apache should be seen as a positive by
everyone including users. If the first thing they have to do is change
package names just to go from what may likely be a trivial update likewise,
that is not very positive; especially if a domain and name, trademarks, are
donated to Apache. There is also the notion of having artifacts that still
run on older versions of a system as well in some cases, such as plugins
and 3rd party library creators, so heavier support burden.

Anyways, I am just addressing all the worry about Apache branding etc. That
branding will be every where; lists, sites, articles, etc. I seriously do
not believe a stable and well known projects package names will be a major
source of confusion. It seems to me, most people I have talked to or worked
with in the industry know how open source donations work, and package names
are generally not the major indicator of ownership when transfers happen;
folks tend to be aware of ecosystem changes and impacts. Maybe some young
and junior folks not yet schooled in the way of the Jedi will have some,
but that is the role of mentoring.

IMHO, thanks,


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message