Just digged deeper into ServiceSupport. It references
org.apache.camel.Service. So if we can agree that util may use the API
and the API may not use util then it could be moved there.
I am not sure if a class you extend from is a util class though. When I
think of a util class I rather think of a small class I instantiate and
call or even call simply static methods.
Perhaps we would need a special package for such base classes. Not sure
how to name it though.
Christian
Am 19.08.2011 16:31, schrieb Christian Schneider:
Anyway we have ServiceSupport in impl which IMHO should have been in
util. That would have been nice as its a good base
class to extend if your class need to be a Camel Service. I wonder if
an experiment by moving it from impl to util will reduce some tangles.
I am not sure if util is a good place. But you are right it should not
be in impl. If it is needed by components it should either be in
org.apache.camel or we need an additional package with classes that
are widely used.
Util could be used but then util may not be used by any API package as
it would create a cycle.
Christian
--
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
