Fix namespace

[quanvo87]

Description

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Checklist:

• [ ] I have submitted a CLA form
• [ ] If applicable, I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• [ ] If applicable, I have added tests to cover my changes.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #68 into master will not change coverage. The diff coverage is 100%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #68   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.35%   87.35%           
=======================================
  Files          13       12    -1     
  Lines         609      609           
=======================================
  Hits          532      532           
  Misses         77       77

Flag	Coverage Δ
#SwiftSMTP	87.35% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
Sources/SwiftSMTP/Mail.swift	98.41% <100%> (+0.23%)	:arrow_up:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 0b2e1b1...f19bbdd. Read the comment docs.

[rafiki270]

@quanvo87 I don't know, moving the user was just a first step to see if you would accept something like that. I would, if you'd be up for it namespace the other objects like Response (rather common as well) and others too? What do you think?

You know, just to keep the architecture consistent with the new change ... obviously this will fix an immediate issue I am having but maybe we should just take it all the way ... :)

[quanvo87]

That is another good point. Do you think they need to be namespaced if they're not public though?

[rafiki270]

Fair point, I didn’t go through the codebase in detail tbh :))) ... if Iser is the only user facing object then we are good to go :)