Hi, We should ask ourselves what really is "core" and do the refactoring Emmanuel proposed.
This will lead to a more maintainable architecture. Cheers, On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 14:38, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi gang, > > we have had an interesting discussion with Ersin lately, about how to use > core-JNDI inside the SP interceptor. Let me explain what is the problem : > > SP allow a user to define some function which has access to the data the > server is storing. That's fine, but in order to guarantee the ease of use, > we decided to expose those objects through JNDI (no need to learn about a > new API, even if it's a better one ;). > > Back in 1.5.4 (or was it 1.5.3?) we decided to move out of core the JNDI > operations, and we created a module named core-jndi : superbe move, so far. > > Now, the problem is that we can't use this core-jndi into the SP > interceptor, simply because core-jndi depends on core, so we can't make the > SP interceptor depends on core-jndi, it would create a circular dependency. > > The solution is pretty simple, though : the SP interceptor has nothing to > do into core, we should create a new module for it (interceptor-sp). > > At this point, we can also extend the idea to all the interceptors : make > them modules, depending on core. > > Thoughts ? > > -- > -- > cordialement, regards, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > directory.apache.org > > > -- Ersin
