Skip to content

Conversation

@kevinherron
Copy link
Collaborator

What problem(s) was I solving?

The package structure was flat, with all classes in com.digitalpetri.util. This made it unclear which module each class belonged to and didn't follow Java conventions for library organization.

What user-facing changes did I ship?

Breaking Change: Package names have been updated across all modules:

Module Old Package New Package
byteops (core) com.digitalpetri.util com.digitalpetri.util.byteops
byteops-netty com.digitalpetri.util com.digitalpetri.util.byteops.netty
byteops-unsigned com.digitalpetri.util com.digitalpetri.util.byteops.unsigned

Users will need to update their import statements when upgrading.

How I implemented it

  • Moved all source files to new package directories matching the module structure
  • Updated package declarations in all Java files
  • Added explicit imports where classes now reference types from other packages
  • Made AbstractByteOpsTest public so it can be extended from test classes in other modules

How to verify it

Manual Testing

  • All tests pass (mvn clean test)

Description for the changelog

Reorganize package structure to com.digitalpetri.util.byteops with module-specific subpackages (netty, unsigned). This is a breaking change requiring import updates.

Move classes from com.digitalpetri.util to more specific packages:
- byteops core: com.digitalpetri.util.byteops
- byteops-netty: com.digitalpetri.util.byteops.netty
- byteops-unsigned: com.digitalpetri.util.byteops.unsigned
@kevinherron kevinherron merged commit 5e5e91a into master Dec 30, 2025
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants