[JSR-354] Re: RI Package name
- From: Werner Keil <werner.keil@...>
- To: "jcurrency_mail@..." <jcurrency_mail@...>
- Subject: [JSR-354] Re: RI Package name
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 03:08:35 +0200
Thanks for the outline.
If JodaMoney implements the JSR it may be used by examples or extension
libraries like those under the org.javamoney umbrella. Several of the EC
discussions around JCP reforms highlighted, that those JSRs implemented by
more than just its own RI are usually the most succesful ones. Unless you
are in a very small niche this is often the case.
One thing you forgot to mention are the examples
- javamoney examples (org.javamoney.examples)
Following either Eclipse or Agorava, one further repository would be good
- javamoney-parent (org.javamoney)
a parent POM for projects under "org.javamoney". Currently the
"org.javamoney" repository fulfills this purpose, but if other sub-projects
like "examples", "TCK", "RI" or "moneta" were all using the same
"org.javamoney" parent, it is a good practice to keep the parent POM
Please note, that each of these also use a dedicated Maven GroupId, thus
every project or module under the examples repository shall use the
"org.javamoney.examples" group, not the top level. I started grouping
everything under "bundles", too in a similar way. Distinct modules like RI
or TCK, see CDI (https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi-tck/blob/master/pom.xml
are best suitable for this, as well. Whether the RI would simply be called
RI or "Moneta", I am not biased about, but I would prefer that name for the
RI over the "libraries" or whatever we may call them. At the moment the
term "Modules" feels best.
CDI defines only the Spec/API and TCK, as the RI is the Weld project in a
separate codebase (or GitHub organization) but as a lose resemblance JSR
107 offers a slightly broader choice of repositories:
In fact, beside its green field RI the project contains a second
implementation, EHCache. Rather unusual for a JSR but it is not part of the
actual JSR, Should this side by side existence of a plain RI and "extended
implementation" appeal, then this could be used under "moneta".
Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member | Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel
Language Champion | Java Godfather
Twitter @wernerkeil | @JSR354 | #EclipseUOMo | #Java_Social | #DevOps
Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
* JMaghreb 2.0: Nov 7-8 2013, Casablanca, Morocco. Werner Keil, JCP EC
Member, JSR 354 EG Member will present "Java Social", "JSR 354"
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Anatole Tresch <atsticks@...> wrote:
> Hi all
> Basically I would like to keep things together, so creating yet another
> project in java.net is not my preferred option.
> About the future adoption I would suggest that the ones using jodamoney
> will keep using it. With inclusion into the jdk this probably will change.
> When that is the case a new version of extras will be published directly
> using the jdk artifacts. So at the end I agree that probably only special
> cases and early adopters will use moneta for a long time, but I am
> completely fine with that.
> One reasonable option would be to enable Extras for being usable with
> jodamoney in a way that switching to the jdk would only have minimal or no
> impact to existing users.
> Summarizing we can have the following repos on git
> - jsr354 api (javax.money)
> - jsr354 ri (org.javamoney.moneta)
> - jsr354 tck (org.javamoney.tck)
> - javamoney lib (org.javamoney)
> Any objections?
> Anatole Tresch
> Glärnischweg 10
> 8620 Wetzikon
> Tel +41 (43) 317 05 30
> Send from Mobile
> Am 06.10.2013 um 01:13 schrieb Werner Keil <werner.keil@...>:
> Thanks for the input. I thought, "moneta" was supposed to be the RI.
> Similar to "Nobis" with JSR 351 or "Tyrus" for WebSockets.
> There is still the option of a java.net project, Based on Stephen's
> preference of having JodaMoney likely implement some, but not be the RI
> (looking at the recent JSR 107 report to the EC, its EC also decided to
> write a new RI from scratch rather than using existing Open Source projects
> like EHCache<347.gif>)
> If Anatole wishes to create a project "Moneta.java.net" that could serve
> as an independent RI with its own package naming.
> Looking at JSR 350, it has 3 projects on java.net
> https://java.net/projects/java-state-managemen and 2 Sub Projects.
> Nobis may not be bound as tightly to JSR 351, but meets the same purpose
> for that JSR.
> Examples and other artifacts could stick to GitHub. Theoretically it may
> also work for an RI with a name, but following Tyrus' example it can't hurt
> to have both (probably mirroring each other at some point, at least
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@...>wrote:
>> There are three packages to be produced
>> - RI
>> - TCK
>> - "enterprise money"
>> Having thought about it, I think it is best to keep Joda-Money
>> separate and not the RI.
>> For me, the obvious naming is simple
>> If you want to give the RI a real name, then great. But I'm going on
>> the assumption that the RI will not be widely adopted and simply
>> exists to be a proof of concept of the interfaces.
>> On 5 October 2013 19:20, Anatole Tresch <atsticks@...> wrote:
>> > For me the tck logically is more related to the spec than the ri. Do we
>> > really prefer org.javamoney.tck in favor of javax.money.tck. ???
>> > Basically i do not like extras as a name. I can imagine that we will
>> > it to a full fledged financial framework in the future. If we call it
>> > javamoney or org.javamoney is secondary for me. Moneta could then be
>> > the core module within javamoney.
>> > Or we go the other way round. Use jodamoney as ri, and provide
>> javamoney as
>> > addition/extension to jodamoney....
>> > So discussion is opened!
>> > Cheers
>> > Anatole
>> > -
>> > Anatole Tresch
>> > Glärnischweg 10
>> > 8620 Wetzikon
>> > Tel +41 (43) 317 05 30
>> > -
>> > Send from Mobile
>> > Am 05.10.2013 um 16:48 schrieb Werner Keil <werner.keil@...>:
>> > Good point. org.javamoney is registered for the EG, so it might be best.
>> > If the prior Doodle with Moneta as preferable RI name also resulted in a
>> > java.net project, then "net.java.moneta" would also work.
>> > I am fine with either, but if RI and/or TCK used org.javamoney, then
>> > let's clarify the project naming on GitHub.
>> > Calling the former "extra" "org.javamoney" seems a bit irritating. If
>> > followed a strict Maven GroupID naming, then the Spec repository should
>> > "javax.money".
>> > I somewhat followed the ThreeTen repository naming when creating
>> > so if any other parts like RI or TCK use the org.javamoney domain, it
>> > be a good idea to either call it "extra" or "extras" again. Or put both
>> > and TCK under "org.javamoney" while leaving the "spec" in a seperate
>> > "javax.money" repository.
>> > WDYT?
>> > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Stephen Colebourne <
>> > wrote:
>> >> Remember that it needs to be a domain you own. Since you don't own
>> >> moneta.org you shouldn't use it.
>> >> I would warn that org.javamoney is complicated by "javamoney" being a
>> >> term against Oracle/JCP restrictions. However, since it is owned and
>> >> no-one has complained, that is probably the best option for a base.
>> >> Thus org.javamoney.moneta would be currently be the most appropriate
>> >> option.
>> >> Stephen
>> >> On 4 October 2013 22:31, Anatole Tresch <atsticks@...> wrote:
>> >> > Hi all
>> >> >
>> >> > we should rename our RI classes from javax.money to something better.
>> >> > we could use
>> >> >
>> >> > org.javamoney as a root package,
>> >> >
>> >> > or go fo the RI name from the ballot
>> >> >
>> >> > org.moneta, or
>> >> > org.gelt, or
>> >> > org.javamoney.moneta
>> >> > org.javamoney.gelt
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >
>> >> > Cheers,
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Anatole Tresch
>> >> > Java Lead Engineer, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >
>> >> > Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1
>> >> > Twitter: @atsticks
>> >> > Blogs: http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> > Google: atsticks
>> >> > Mobile +41-76 344 62 79