Re: Change JavaXPCOM interfaces package name?

Javier, can you create a "Eclipse Refactoring Script" for package name
change?? It's could be very useful for Eclipse 3.2 developers, the only
that we need to do is apply this script in our workspace.

More information about this in " Create and apply refactoring scripts"
and " JAR file export with refactorings" sections in
http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-3.2-200606291905/new_noteworthy/eclipse-news-part2.html

Regards

Artem Ananiev wrote:
> My opinion is that changing the package name to org.mozilla.interfaces
> is a good idea, however I should mention that this change would force
> all the developers using JavaXPCOM to change their projects if they want
> to use the newer versions of the library.
>
> Artem
>
> Javier Pedemonte wrote:
>
> > Currently, all of the generated Mozilla interfaces are put in the
> > package "org.mozilla.xpcom".  In
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330256, I tried to come up
> > with a better solution.
> >
> > Ideally, the interfaces should their own package; as in
> > "org.mozilla.network", "org.mozilla.dom", "com.foo.bar" (as in a company
> > called Foo that wishes to release a Bar extension).  Unfortunately,
> > while XPIDL (the Mozilla interface language) has support for
> > 'namespaces', xpidl (the tool for processing Mozilla interfaces) assumes
> > a flat namespace.  So this solution is not viable at the moment.
> >
> > Instead, I propose changing the package name to the more generic
> > "org.mozilla.interfaces".  That way, all the interfaces, including those
> > by a 3rd party, don't get lumped under 'xpcom'.  The Mozilla class and
> > related classes would stay under "org.mozilla.xpcom".
> >
> > For those of you who have used JavaXPCOM, does this sound good?  Please
> > let me know.
> >
> >
> > javier pedemonte
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev-tech-java mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-java