> So the idea of keeping even internal components of Calcite "more public" is > rather a good thing than the bad one from my point of view.
This can go two ways. There is the type of change that I call “drill a hole” where someone requests that an implementation detail be made public so that they can use it, but they don’t provide much justification, and don’t provide a use case that might be useful to others. The other is where someone converts the internal mechanism into a genuine feature, with a use case, documentation, and comprehensive tests that help others understand and use the feature. The “drill a hole” changes are a net burden on the Calcite project because we have to maintain the implementation going forward. I’m not going to make a judgment about whether this proposed change is positive. The key thing is to think of it as adding a feature, not just adding the word “public” in one or two source files. Julian
