Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > What are com.blah or org.blah?

Reply
Thread Tools

What are com.blah or org.blah?

 
 
Karl Uppiano
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007

"Ian Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Andrew Thompson wrote:
>> Daniel Dyer wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...you can probably come up with package names
>>>along similar lines. If you host your project on java.net or
>>>sourceforge.net you have a ready-made sub-domain. If you are a student
>>>you can use your university or college's domain combined with your user
>>>account name, e.g. <university.domain>.<department>.<username>.

>>
>>
>> And if all else fails, perhaps 'ind' for 'individual'..
>>
>> ind.thompson.andrew.MyClass
>>
>> (though that is a stupid name, for a class)
>>
>> Andrew T.
>>

>
> I suspect more than one individual Andrew Thompsons exists today and more
> might exist in the future. So that doesn't seem like a great scheme.


The amount of effort to make your packages globally unique should be
proportional to the likelihood that they will ever need to be globally
unique.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Furious George
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007

Karl Uppiano wrote:
> "Ian Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Andrew Thompson wrote:
> >> Daniel Dyer wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>...you can probably come up with package names
> >>>along similar lines. If you host your project on java.net or
> >>>sourceforge.net you have a ready-made sub-domain. If you are a student
> >>>you can use your university or college's domain combined with your user
> >>>account name, e.g. <university.domain>.<department>.<username>.
> >>
> >>
> >> And if all else fails, perhaps 'ind' for 'individual'..
> >>
> >> ind.thompson.andrew.MyClass
> >>
> >> (though that is a stupid name, for a class)
> >>
> >> Andrew T.
> >>

> >
> > I suspect more than one individual Andrew Thompsons exists today and more
> > might exist in the future. So that doesn't seem like a great scheme.

>
> The amount of effort to make your packages globally unique should be
> proportional to the likelihood that they will ever need to be globally
> unique.


If you are losing all your hair worrying about this, then why not just
randomly draw a number from 0,2^128. The probability of a collision is
extraordinarily low.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Ersatznom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007
Daniel Pitts wrote:
> Actually, I'd be amazed if you could afford a java-development computer
> and NOT afford a $35/yr domain name. No one said you had to have a
> website, just a domain


The latter is a *recurring* cost, however, and what good is a domain
without a website worthy of a separate domain? Oh -- naming your Java
packages. Of course, that amounts to a defacto $35 annual license
renewal fee for using supposedly free development tools, I hope you
realize...

unless of course you say screw it and just use a made up name unlikely
to be duplicated by anyone else.

I hate to contemplate the amount of refactoring that's needed for any
project still in use when the original domain lapses for whatever reason
to keep it in compliance. Even using Eclipse. And remember, software is
ALWAYS still in use long after everyone planned for it to be. That means
after the domain is sunsetted, after anything else is ... etc.

Is the domain namespace really scarce enough to justify not handing
freebies out to everyone in the world, their dog, AND their organization
for that matter? Charging a not-insignificant (and recurring!) fee for a
non-scarce thing like an identifier smacks of capitalism run amok. It
amounts to an online property tax, being levied by private business, on
the online equivalent of land holdings. What ever became of the good ol'
days of fighting violent, bloody wars in miserable weather in the name
of things like "no taxation without representation!"?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Uppal
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007
Furious George wrote:

> If you are losing all your hair worrying about this, then why not just
> randomly draw a number from 0,2^128. The probability of a collision is
> extraordinarily low.


Or use the MAC address of (one of) the network adaptors in your computer (I
realise that not everyone /has/ a computer, but...).

-- chris



 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Uppal
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007
John Ersatznom wrote:

> Daniel Pitts wrote:
> > Actually, I'd be amazed if you could afford a java-development computer
> > and NOT afford a $35/yr domain name. No one said you had to have a
> > website, just a domain

>
> The latter is a *recurring* cost, however, and what good is a domain
> without a website worthy of a separate domain?


It makes no difference how you name your packages if they are only used within
your own organisation (living room, whatever). The only constraint is that
you avoid "inbound" clashes (as it were) which you can do by, say, putting all
your stuff under "local" (local.mystuff.whatever) since "local" isn't a TLD and
is unlikely to become one. If, on the other hand, you /do/ want to make your
code more generally available then you almost certainly are going to put it
somewhere with an associated global URL -- in which case you can use that for
the root of the package names.

-- chris




 
Reply With Quote
 
Laurent D.A.M. MENTEN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007
Chris Uppal wrote:
> Furious George wrote:
>
>> If you are losing all your hair worrying about this, then why not just
>> randomly draw a number from 0,2^128. The probability of a collision is
>> extraordinarily low.

>
> Or use the MAC address of (one of) the network adaptors in your computer (I
> realise that not everyone /has/ a computer, but...).
>
> -- chris
>
>
>


and why not use your bank account number? this one is unique for sure
and you the least you can even expect is some guy gives you money!!!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007
Chris Uppal wrote:
> It makes no difference how you name your packages if they are only used within
> your own organisation (living room, whatever). The only constraint is that
> you avoid "inbound" clashes (as it were) which you can do by, say, putting all
> your stuff under "local" (local.mystuff.whatever) since "local" isn't a TLD and
> is unlikely to become one. If, on the other hand, you /do/ want to make your
> code more generally available then you almost certainly are going to put it
> somewhere with an associated global URL -- in which case you can use that for
> the root of the package names.


In fact, the use of non-standard TLDs solves the "people's rights against the
fatcat capitalists!" rave. You only have to pay for domains under ICANN
hegemony, and then only if you intend them to be visible on the 'Net. You are
not forbidden to use, say, 'com.exxon.whatever' for your own package names,
except insofar as you publish them in a way that conflicts with someone's
intellectual property or trademark rights.

But 'folk TLDs' avoid even that problem. You could even use your name itself
as a domain:

doe.john.m.somepackage

or we could as a society agree that 'local' or 'indiv' or some such is the
global free TLD, and just risk collisions. After all, if by some fluke both
John M. Q. Doe, IIIs wrote Java(tm) code, what are the chances that their
package and class names will collide in the same project? If it did in my
project, I'd probably contact both Does to ask their help.

package indiv.doe.john.m.q.iii.somepackage;

- Lew
 
Reply With Quote
 
Furious George
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-06-2007

Laurent D.A.M. MENTEN wrote:
> Chris Uppal wrote:
> > Furious George wrote:
> >
> >> If you are losing all your hair worrying about this, then why not just
> >> randomly draw a number from 0,2^128. The probability of a collision is
> >> extraordinarily low.

> >
> > Or use the MAC address of (one of) the network adaptors in your computer (I
> > realise that not everyone /has/ a computer, but...).


Yeah, but what if I sell the computer. Then I have to refactor. What
a pain. I think it would be better to use a number based on your DNA.

> >
> > -- chris
> >
> >
> >

>
> and why not use your bank account number? this one is unique for sure
> and you the least you can even expect is some guy gives you money!!!


To guarantee uniqueness, you should include your PIN. Make sure to
email me both numbers so I will not mistakenly use them in my java
projects.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Furious George
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-07-2007

Furious George wrote:
> Laurent D.A.M. MENTEN wrote:
> > Chris Uppal wrote:
> > > Furious George wrote:
> > >
> > >> If you are losing all your hair worrying about this, then why not just
> > >> randomly draw a number from 0,2^128. The probability of a collision is
> > >> extraordinarily low.
> > >
> > > Or use the MAC address of (one of) the network adaptors in your computer (I
> > > realise that not everyone /has/ a computer, but...).

>
> Yeah, but what if I sell the computer. Then I have to refactor. What
> a pain. I think it would be better to use a number based on your DNA.


I've got it. Everyone who owns a MAC address can have a java domain of
the form
mac.${MACADDRESS}.${TIMESTAMP}
where ${MACADDRESS} is their respective MAC address and ${TIMESTAMP} is
the Unix timestamp of some date in which they owned the MAC address.

Advantages:
Most people can have many more domains than they would ever use.
If they sell the MAC address, the new owner will not collide with them.

Disadvantages:
Some people don't own and have never owned a MAC address.
We would have to get ICANN to promise never to release mac as a TLD.
Defective clocks could cause collisions.

>
> > >
> > > -- chris
> > >
> > >
> > >

> >
> > and why not use your bank account number? this one is unique for sure
> > and you the least you can even expect is some guy gives you money!!!

>
> To guarantee uniqueness, you should include your PIN. Make sure to
> email me both numbers so I will not mistakenly use them in my java
> projects.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Pitts
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-07-2007
John Ersatznom wrote:
> Daniel Pitts wrote:
> > Actually, I'd be amazed if you could afford a java-development computer
> > and NOT afford a $35/yr domain name. No one said you had to have a
> > website, just a domain

>
> The latter is a *recurring* cost, however, and what good is a domain
> without a website worthy of a separate domain? Oh -- naming your Java
> packages. Of course, that amounts to a defacto $35 annual license
> renewal fee for using supposedly free development tools, I hope you
> realize...
>
> unless of course you say screw it and just use a made up name unlikely
> to be duplicated by anyone else.
>
> I hate to contemplate the amount of refactoring that's needed for any
> project still in use when the original domain lapses for whatever reason
> to keep it in compliance. Even using Eclipse. And remember, software is
> ALWAYS still in use long after everyone planned for it to be. That means
> after the domain is sunsetted, after anything else is ... etc.
>
> Is the domain namespace really scarce enough to justify not handing
> freebies out to everyone in the world, their dog, AND their organization
> for that matter? Charging a not-insignificant (and recurring!) fee for a
> non-scarce thing like an identifier smacks of capitalism run amok. It
> amounts to an online property tax, being levied by private business, on
> the online equivalent of land holdings. What ever became of the good ol'
> days of fighting violent, bloody wars in miserable weather in the name
> of things like "no taxation without representation!"?


Actually, Domain names used to be "free" if you hosted your own DNS
servers, and Diamonds are a very non-scarce, but quite expensive.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments