Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Refactor all packages to org.consensusj.* #29

Closed
msgilligan opened this issue Dec 9, 2017 · 8 comments · Fixed by #75
Closed

Refactor all packages to org.consensusj.* #29

msgilligan opened this issue Dec 9, 2017 · 8 comments · Fixed by #75
Assignees
@msgilligan
Milestone
v0.6.0

Comments

@msgilligan
Copy link
Member

Refactor (move) all packages to the org.consensusj package.

It probably makes sense to do some other package and perhaps submodule changes as part of this process.
@msgilligan msgilligan self-assigned this Dec 9, 2017
@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

I have some ideas and can move ahead on this on my own.

@dexX7 @greglaun Any thoughts or opinions on this?

@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

@JeremyRand -- any thoughts or opinions?

@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

I can't imagine there will be any objections to doing a straightforward move from com.msgilligan to org.consensusj and have already moved one sub package: 36d24fe

But I'm wondering if anyone has any other issues or suggested while we're moving stuff around.

@JeremyRand
Copy link
Contributor

I'm totally fine with renaming the packages. (It'll cause me a little bit of bother next time I rebase my not-yet-upstreamed Namecoin fork of ConsensusJ, but that's something I signed up for when I made a fork and didn't get it fully upstreamed quickly, so I can't complain about that. :) )

@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

Note that we should address Issue #38 as part of this refactoring so we can start migrating to JPMS (Java Platform Module System)

@msgilligan msgilligan mentioned this issue Jul 14, 2018
Closed
@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

So for modules that are specific to particular cryptocurrencies, I'm proposing sub-package hierarchies named:

  • org.consensusj.bitcoin
  • org.consensusj.namecoin
  • org.consensusj.ethereum

Does this seem reasonable @JeremyRand ?

@JeremyRand
Copy link
Contributor

So for modules that are specific to particular cryptocurrencies, I'm proposing sub-package hierarchies named:

  • org.consensusj.bitcoin
  • org.consensusj.namecoin
  • org.consensusj.ethereum

Does this seem reasonable @JeremyRand ?

Sounds good to me.

@msgilligan
Copy link
Member Author

msgilligan commented Jul 14, 2018 •
edited
Loading

  • Refactor Namecoin & Eth to org.consensusj subpackages: 1276220

@msgilligan msgilligan added this to the v0.5.0 milestone Apr 29, 2019
msgilligan added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 17, 2020
@msgilligan
Update bintray links to consensusj
1f8e9ae 
Rather than the old `bitcoinj-addons`. Note: we’re still
in the `msgilligan` Bintray until Issue #29 and Issue #38
are finished.
@msgilligan msgilligan modified the milestones: v0.5.1, v0.6.0 Jun 17, 2020
@msgilligan msgilligan mentioned this issue May 11, 2021
Open
@msgilligan msgilligan linked a pull request Oct 26, 2021 that will close this issue
Refactor to org.consensusj #75
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@msgilligan msgilligan

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v0.6.0
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Refactor to org.consensusj ConsensusJ/consensusj
2 participants
@msgilligan @JeremyRand