On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > On 7/23/11 12:32 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 9:28 PM,<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Author: elecharny >>> Date: Fri Jul 22 18:28:27 2011 >>> New Revision: 1149683 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1149683&view=rev >>> Log: >>> o Get rid of the SchemaService class : it still exists, but all the >>> remaining methods are static (we don't need anymore to have a schemaService >>> instance in the DirectoryService) >> >> OK I see now. Please ignore my last post regarding whether or not we >> removed this interface. I now recall our conversation regarding >> getting rid of this service. The SchemaManager basically should handle >> it all. Will be nice to even get rid of these static methods. > > Well, I thought about moving those methods to SchemaManager, but it's deeply > coupled with the DirectoryService. And as the SchemaManager is part of the > LDAP API, we can't create such a link.
Ahh yes this is where we have a balancing act and probably one of the drivers that made us separate these two. > Another thougth I had was to move all the methods to DS, but I thought that > would make this class a big fat boy, so I kept it as a standalone helper > class. Yeah sounds best as a utility class. Perhaps then we should just do away with the misnomer of SchemaService and name it something more appropriate. > I still have to check if we can make some further improvement in this area > (for instance, the Dao stuff might be reviewed too). Right. I have some ideas on this stuff. I'd like to touch base and discuss these details towards the tail end of this coming week. Best Regards, -- Alex
