[OpenID] use of net.openid vs com.sxip for Java libraries

[Gabe Wachob]

+1 from me. 

 

  _____  

From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On
Behalf Of Justen Stepka
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:00 PM
To: openid-general; openid4java at googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [OpenID] use of net.openid vs com.sxip for Java libraries

 

With regards to the name spacing issues for the OpenID4Java project, I have
configured the domain to redirect to the OpenID4Java.org Google project
page.

http://www.openid4java.org  <http://www.openid4java.org> 

If everyone is fine with it moving forward we can refactor to this package
structure.

Cheers,

Justen

On 4/5/07, Justen Stepka <justen.stepka at gmail.com> wrote:

I went ahead and purchased  <http://openid4java.org> openid4java.org with
regards to our Maven repository name spacing concerns. In the past when
domains have been talked about on the web I have found randoms seems to buy
them. 

Should we decide to go down this route in the future, this is now an option
for us.

This weekend in Australia is a long holiday, however I will get a DNS server
configured and setup that will redirect to the OpenID4Java Google Code site.


Cheers,

Justen

-- 
Justen Stepka
http://www.jstepka.name/blog/

 

On 4/5/07, Recordon, David < <mailto:drecordon at verisign.com>
drecordon at verisign.com> wrote:

+1, I feel it should either use org.sxip, com.sxip , or the proposal of
org.openid4java.

OpenID.net should not be specifically endorsing any specific
implementation, just as the foundation will not be creating libraries
itself.  There must be a seperation between the OpenID protocol and 
implementations of it.  Otherwise who is to say what is the official
Java OpenID implementation?

--David

-----Original Message-----
From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On
Behalf Of Johannes Ernst
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 5:03 PM 
To: openid-general
Subject: Re: [OpenID] use of net.openid vs com.sxip for Java libraries

Just because I implement an HTTP server doesn't mean I get to put things
into the org.w3c namespace, does it?

What's wrong with using the project name? [I also thought that 
openid.net was not in the business of constructing, or endorsing
software implementations.]

On Apr 3, 2007, at 16:36, Josh Hoyt wrote: 

> On 4/3/07, David Fuelling < sappenin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 to using net.openid (in some form or fashion) in the package
>> name.  As
>> you say, it conveys that this is a community project that everyone 
>> can participate in and use.  Maybe to prevent collisions, the
>> openid4java code should sit in 'net.openid.sxip' or
>> 'net.openid.openid4java'
>> package...?
> 
> There is at least one more Java OpenID 2 implementation (not to
> mention OpenID 1 implementations), so I think a little more
> namespacing than just net.openid (such as the net.openid.openid4java
> that you suggested) is appropriate. In general, it's probably a good
> idea for the OpenID foundation to have a policy about managing its
> namespaces, but I think the people who are working on the foundation 
> are currently in the process of frying larger fishes.
>
> Josh








-- 
Justen Stepka
http://www.jstepka.name/blog/ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20070410/a89a9339/attachment-0001.htm>