Unico Hommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido Casper wrote: >> >> I would like to make the following changes to the 2.1 repo and will >> go ahead if noone objects (as soon I find some time): >> >> -Creating a repository block and moving there all source interfaces >> not part of excalibur's sourceresolve package. > > +1 > >> -Moving there the SourceInspector interface and implementations > > Yep. > >> -Adding a setSourceProperty() method to the SourceInspector interface > > Already have it on my local copy. :-)
Cool! So I leave this to you :-) > >> -Marking the slide block as unstable > > That would be because the slide block then depends on repository block > and inherits its unstable state. > >> -Moving there Linotypes repository abstraction(s) >> >> So the repository block would currently be not much more than a >> single place to better be able >> compare/comment/improve/unify/consolidate. >> >> This would remove the dependency of the webdav block and the >> scratchpad block on the slide block but make them all (including >> Linotype) depend on the repository block. >> > > You could also move TraversableSourceDescriptionGenerator into the > repository block. It's a pair with the source extension interfaces and > doing so would remove the dependency of the scratchpad block on the > repository block. OK. > > I am currently working on a simple JdbcSourceInspector for mutable > SourceProperties and a RepositorySource that acts as a Source wrapper > and adds Inspectability. You really rock (can't wait to have a look at the LocationMapModule :-) Guido > > -- Unico > >> Guido >> >> >> Unico Hommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Guido Casper wrote: >>>> Unico Hommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One of the things I've noticed that I would like to discuss is >>>>> that the Source extensions such as LockableSource, >>>>> InspectableSource, etc. are currently all located inside the >>>>> Slide block, whereas they should probably be located in a more >>>>> general block (a repository block?) or else move them to >>>>> excalibur sourceresolve. >>>> >>>> I thought about that as well. The problem is that some of them do >>>> not seem general enough to move to excalibur. I'm +1 for a >>>> separate block although I'm not sure about the name. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, a separate block seems more obvious to me too, at least for >>> some of the functionality. Property management may be general >>> enough for Excalibur imho.
