CPO & eMSP vs. Sender & Receiver

[andacata]

Hello,

I want to start a discussion (again 😄 ) about the use of CPO & eMSP vs. Sender & Receiver.

As an example, I'm currently implementing the ChargingProfiles module which allows different topologies:

• eMSP <-> CPO
• SCSP <-> eMSP
• SCSP <-> CPO

As you can see, the eMSP can act as a Sender or as a Receiver, so naming ChargingProfilesEmspServer will be very confusing.

[lilgallon]

We started using Emsp and Cpo in class names because that is what is used in the OCPI spec (at least for Location and Session modules). Reading the ChargingProfiles spec, I agree with you, it may be confusing.

Having XXXXSenderServer or XXXXSenderInterface may also be confusing. Taking Locations modules in example, it would give:

• LocationsCpoClient.kt -> LocationsSenderClient.kt
• LocationsCpoInterface.kt -> LocationsSenderInterface.kt
• LocationsCpoServer.kt -> LocationsSenderServer.kt
• LocationsEmspClient.kt -> LocationsReceiverClient.kt
• LocationsEmspInterface.kt -> LocationsReceiverInterface.kt
• LocationsEmspServer.kt -> LocationsReceiverServer.kt

I believe there's room for improvement in our approach to naming, but I'm not entirely certain about the best approach

calling @xhanin's insight