There are mainly DI module configurations in "configuration.rop"
packages, which I think makes sense. However in
"configuration.rop.client" there are also ClientRuntime classes, which
I'm guessing can be moved "org.apache.cayenne.rop" package for consistency.
Dima
On 2/4/16 1:16 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
On 21/01/2016 11:39pm, Dzmitry Kazimirchyk wrote:
One of the questions here is still whether we want to go all the way and
introduce changes which can potentially brake things for upgrading users or we
should preserve the old HessianROPServlet and the logic around it and have a
new pluggable approach as an alternative to what we currently have.
What is the reason that half the implementation is in org.apache.cayenne.rop
and the other half in org.apache.cayenne.configuration.rop? Why are some http
parts in org.apache.cayenne.rop.http but not all of them?
Given that we are breaking backward compatibility for people who have
overridden specific bits of this, should we tidy up?
Ari
