Big namespace cleanup

[firebird-automations]

Put all namespaces inside the Firebird namespace.

Avoid qualification of namespace when inside it or in children namespaces.

Put *_proto.h headers in namespaces.

[aafemt]

Move Why namespace inside Firebird
Move Replication namespace to Firebird::Jrd::Replication
Move namespace Ods to Firebird::Jrd::Ods

What's the purpose? It makes even less sense in company with "using namespace Firebird" everywhere.

It looks like you just wanna to kill every open PR with endless merge conflicts and build errors.

[AlexPeshkoff]

Adriano please in a few words - why is "Put all namespaces inside the Firebird namespace" needed?

[asfernandes]

Adriano please in a few words - why is "Put all namespaces inside the Firebird namespace" needed?

This has been discussed more than one time.

Did you see any other software written that uses many top level namespace? Not only in C++...

Did you think is correct to need to use :: Firebird everywhere outside common because it's well know fact that headers should not use using namespace?

Did you think it's correct to have part of the software not using namespaces and that adding namespace to it in the way they were being used would make point above even worse?

[aafemt]

The sole purpose of namepaces is preventing conflict of names. Including everything into single namespace (global namespace with using namespace as well) completely defeats this purpose, and such usage of namespace Firebird was never discussed in firebird-devel list.

I wonder: was this PR made using AI?

[asfernandes]

Alex and others core developers:

• Discussion in 2023 in thread "Namespaces": https://groups.google.com/g/firebird-devel/c/orn6f6h4Ny0/m/NBCAp5WTCAAJ
• Discussion in 2011 in thread "Namespaces": https://sourceforge.net/p/firebird/mailman/message/27345253/

In both times part of the proposals was what just I did here and that structure of namespaces had positive (certainly not negative) comments by Dmitry at least.

Or maybe the question is that 15 years was not sufficient time for the discussion to fully happen? :)