Revit_Toolkit: Clean up namespace/assembly names

[pawelbaran]

THIS ISSUE IS A FOLLOW-UP FROM #385

Description:

Assemblies and namespaces sitting in Revit_UI folder to be reshuffled in order to make them more informative. My proposal (discussed to some extent with @al-fisher and @IsakNaslundBh) presented below.

Project renaming:

• _RevitUI - to be renamed to _RevitListener as it is not the entire UI, just listener
• _Engine_RevitUI - to be renamed to _RevitAPIEngine (will allow exposing it in the UIs that work in Revit context)
• _Adapter_RevitUI - to be renamed to _Revit_AdapterPlugin to highlight that it sits on the Revit side (but is not UI)
• projects to be taken out of the _RevitUI folder and placed on the same level as all others

Namespace renaming:

• BH.UI.Revit - to be renamed to BH.UI.Revit.Listener
• BH.Adapter.Revit - to stay untouched
• BH.UI.Revit.Adapter - to be renamed to BH.Adapter.Revit.Plugin
• BH.oM.Adapters.Revit - to be renamed to BH.oM.External.Revit
• BH.Engine.Adapters.Revit - to be renamed to BH.Engine.External.Revit
• BH.UI.Revit.Engine - to be renamed to BH.Engine.External.RevitAPI
• BH.oM.Adapters.Revit.Interface - Interface suffix to be removed, aligned as above

Class renaming:

• RevitUIAdapter - to be renamed to RevitAdapterPlugin

Folder and file renaming:

• folder AdapterActions in Revit_UI to be renamed to EventHandlers
• Push.cs file in the above folder to be renamed to PushEvent.cs
• Pull.cs file in the above folder to be renamed to PullEvent.cs

What do you guys think? Any big no from anyone?

[pawelbaran]

I updated the content of this issue following the discussion in #385 - @adecler @alelom @al-fisher could you please have a look and flag up if there is any inconsistency in here? If not, I will action this in the current milestone.

[alelom]

Great to see a good summary like this! Agree 100%:

• The renamings proposed here would be highly beneficial for general understanding, compliance and tidy up.
• Great idea about the EventHandlers / AdapterAction change.
• Agree with everything else too.

[adecler]

I agree that the current project names and namespaces need to be improved. But I am not sure I like the proposed solution as it is not compliant. For example, a project should always end with either oM, Engine, Adapter, or UI. This is not just to make it easier for people to find their way around the code structure but also to enable automated processes.

As always, Revit is a more complicated beast so it might be worth having a proper meeting around this to see if (and how) we need to extend our conventions or if we can obtain clarity with the existing one.

[pawelbaran]

Bumping to 3.2 due to BHoM_UI #223