[jrawio-dev] Re: Re: Re: API CHANGES: *.raw packages renamed to *.craw

[Endre Stølsvik <java@stolsvik.com>]

What if you sell tidalwave? The FLOSS licensing guarantees the openness, but the product name then will become absurd.

What if you discontinue tidalwave?

It's the same silly story with GlazedLists, where all of glazedlist[s].[org|com] are available - but they choose to use a name of a supersmall company whose primary business is selling guns and ammo - because that was where it got its initial funding when the primary author was some kid in highschool. (odell.ca)

I don't get this logic. At all. Misunderstood and failed thankfulness, IMHO.

Why not instead use "org.jraw." or something like that - with an available domain that I could buy and sponsor if the economics are the problem ($15 py at gandi.net, even less other places). On this domain, and in the source releases, a rather prominent thanks to tidalwave bla bla whatever could be featured. Does anyone NOT know where OpenOffice is sponsored? Even Eclipse, whose organization is actually forked off? NetBeans?

The package name as it stands doesn't lend itself the "community spirit" - it rather instead sounds like a fully proprietary product which happens to be open for people to "loan". And that is really what I've considered it too, in this regard I fully agree with Igor. (Once, way ago, I sent a mail to the dev-list. It has never been answered. Even suddenly when you DID send a message to that list years afterwards, I thought - maybe he now reads it. But no).

And, to drive this point home: You have, AFAIK, never asked "the community" about choices. Even this change you just _informed_ the list about. I do appreciate that this more or less is 100% your code - but if you actually want this to have any semblance of an "open source _project_", you must TRY to foster the community by airing thoughts on the list etc.

(Just for interest: How many people are on the lists?)

But still, dude, thanks for a good product. It is, AFAIK, the only one of its kind, and I appreciate your research and code!

Endre.

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 13:04, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giudici@tidalwave.it> wrote:

Igor Malinin wrote:

Hi!

I always felt it a bit strange that packages are named after file suffixes. It just not the right solution. What if some other vendor calls their file .raw too - should then they be merged in the same package with Leica? I guess no. It probably would be much better then to separate them by vendor. And probably it would be good to separate file handlers from common code by some additional package level, like "it.tidalwave.imageio.readers.canon", "it.tidalwave.imageio.readers.leica", etc. and use file suffixes only for established standards, like "it.tidalwave.imageio.readers.dng".

Makes sense, specially if part of the current classes become a public API. I'm taking care of this observation.

In case you are refactoring anyway it could be good time to review package structure, probably even more. As you have told already you would like for this project wider community participation. And you have even registered ptoject @ java.net, so when java.net forge is (IMHO) the worst forge I ever seen (I will write later about this), the jrawio.java.net is very good 'independent' name and base for packages. it.tidalwave sounds just too 'proprietary'. Have you thought about it?

Well, jrawio is an official product of tidalwave, that's why I switched to a jrawio.tidalwave.it domain (moreover, I have full control of the CMS behind it - neither Java.Net or Kenai.com have anything more than single HTML hosting). This sounds no different than Spring being hosted at Interface21 (that renamed to SpringSource, which is still a firm name). The openness of the project is guaranteed by its FLOSS licensing.

--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/blog
Fabrizio.Giudici@tidalwave.it - mobile: +39 348.150.6941