Thorsten Scherler wrote:
El jue, 06-04-2006 a las 17:40 +0200, Andreas Hartmann escribió:
Hi Lenya devs,
currently, it's not clear which classes+interfaces form
the Lenya API (i.e., have to stay backwards compatible
and therefore may be used by client code).
Examples are AbstractUsecase and DocumentUsecase:
Can you extend these classes without the danger of
incompatible changes in future 1.4.x versions?
I am unsure what to tell you. We have a couple of usecases that extend
this classes. IMO this default implementations should reflect the least
common denominator
+1
and as soon as 1.4.x is in the release cycle they
*should* be backwards compatible.
IMO AbstractUsecase and DocumentUsecase are general enough
to put them into the API.
I like the approach taken by Avalon/Excalibur:
- framework/api/src/java
- framework/api/src/test
- framework/impl/src/java
- framework/impl/src/test
For example: AbstractLogEnabled is part of the API,
AbstractConfiguration is not. A disadvantage of this
approach is that you can't tell whether a class is
part of the API without knowing where it is located
in the source tree. Maybe we can solve this using
package names which contain "impl":
o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.*
o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.impl.*
Modules are another story, but maybe the same concept
can be applied there.
WDYT?
Yeah, with this move we as well should harmonize the naming for the
implementation classes.
We have now:
- Default{api-class-name}.java
- {api-class-name}Impl.java
I'm using Default{*} if I want to point out explicitely
that the class is just an example implementation, and
{*}Impl if it is meant to be (more or less) the only
implementation. But the differences are subtle, and
it's fine with me to use only one naming convention.
- {different-name-then-the-api-class-name}.java
IMO if we agree on
o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.*
o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.impl.*
Then we should have
- o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.*
* {api-class-name}.java
- o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.impl.*
* {api-class-name}.java
IMO this is not very convenient, because you have to use
explicit package declarations (which is quite verbose),
and the class name references are ambiguous.
For example:
package org.apache.lenya.cms.impl.Document;
class Document implements org.apache.lenya.cms.Document {
public org.apache.lenya.cms.Document getParent() {
....
org.apache.lenya.cms.Document doc = ...
return doc;
}
}
In other classes in the *.impl package you might want to
access *.impl.Document instances directly (not via the
interface), which is perfectly valid. IMO this makes the
code hard to understand, because you always have to check
the imports to know if it's an *.Document or *.impl.Document.
I'd prefer
- o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.*
* {api-class-name}.java
- o.a.lenya.cms.usecase.impl.*
* {api-class-name}Impl.java
Thanks for your comments!
-- Andreas
--
Andreas Hartmann
Wyona Inc. - Open Source Content Management - Apache Lenya
http://www.wyona.com http://lenya.apache.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
