On 10/21/11 3:12 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
2) Controls, Extended operations : IMO, encoding and decoding operations
are by far too complex for those who have no knowledge about the way we do
that. Actually, that mean Kiran and me, maybe Pierre-Arnaud with a bit of
training. Ok, this sounds really bad, but we also have to consider that we
are not likely to add new controls or extended operations frequently.
It's really dangerous to make these kinds of presumptions even if you're
right to a large extent. Because you just never know what itch people really
will need to scratch.
Well, what I feel as dangerous is that we have so few people able to
write a codec :/
But, yes, this assumption might perfectly prove to be damn wrong.
I'm in disagreement about not making this aspect an extension point. I think
it's critical for third parties to be able to use our API and make it
successful. Perhaps we need better tooling support to assist to some degree
in designing extensions and controls or maybe just some script utility. Who
knows what can happen in this area.
Don't get me wrong : they *have* to be extension point, but we can live
with what we have for 2.0.
We will have to inject more controls and more extended operation
support, more specifically in the API, that's a fact.
However, I consider that it can be done later, with minor versions
(1.0.1, etc).
I would say : wait for a future version (2.0.1 or even later).
I think we already have an extensible solution right now don't we? You can
add your own control no matter how hard it is right now.
Yes, using the GenericControl. However, it won't encode and decode, so
it's ok on the client side, assuming that the client inject the encoded
payload.
Not very convenient, I agree...
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
