From: Rich Kilmer <rich@...>
Date: 2001-12-06T14:32:56+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:27630] Re: Package Naming

Thomas...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas R. Corbin [mailto:tc@clark.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:53 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML; undisclosed-recipients:
> Subject: [ruby-talk:27615] Re: Package Naming
> 
> 
> Rich Kilmer wrote:
> 
> [ . . . ] 
> > You get into refactoring hell ;)
> > (from someone who had to do this MANY times)
> 
>         What circumstances caused you to have to do so many 
> refactorings?  
> I'm wondering if I've just been lucky, but I haven't really had 
> to do it all
> that often.

Circumstances...

1) Startup a company 1995 (ex nihilo)

2) Write a large framework starting in Java Alpha II (1995) (like 250k lines, 70+packages)

3) Name your packages after your company domain and product (like sun told us to)

4) Use a third party library based on a package "libraryname.classname" (like sun said NOT to do, but needed the library)

Three years later...

5) Change the name of the company (and domain) (major refactor)

6) The library is finally updated to use the standard convention of "com.domain.libraryname.classname" (major refactor)

One year later...

7) Change the name of the product, reorganize the structure for maintainability (major refactor)

One year later...

8) Change the product direction, lose a bunch of packages, write a bunch more, reorganize the structure for maintainability (major refactor)

one year later

9) Company files chapter 7...technology locked up in legal hell.

-Rich

PS. Now you know why Ruby is a breath of fresh air ;)