Thanks Fernando, I totally forgot that some client bundle will use it as base for adding transports. We need to reorganize in that way. Julien
Le Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:24:34 -0700, Fernando Padilla <[email protected]> a écrit : > Normally through OSGi you choose what packages to expose to the rest > of the world and which ones to keep private. So normally you expose > the Service-Apis but keep their implementations private. > > But actually, Mina is not a stand alone service per-se, since > AbstractIoSession is also a building block, that someone else will > want to use to make their own IoSession right? So Mina is both a > Service-Api (interfaces), plus a collection of building blocks > (exported packages) which are all going to be exposed through OSGi > (if that is your goal). > > So you're going to be exporting all of these classes anyhow.. no real > need to create sub packages. Unless you do have a few classes you > know you want to keep private.. but probably not. > > > On 10/20/09 11:57 PM, Julien Vermillard wrote: > > Le Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:30:16 +0530, > > Ashish<[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=827715&view=rev > >>> Log: > >>> more AbstractIoSession, to be continued > >>> > >>> Modified: > >>> > >>> mina/branches/3.0/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/impl/AbstractIoSession.java > >>> > >>> > >> Julien, > >> > >> Do we need *impl* as package name? Coz anyways we are not going to > >> stuff everything here. > >> Can we retain the implementations in their respective packages like > >> Sessions stuff in *session* package? > >> > >> wdyt? > >> > >> > > Well it's much easier for OSGi bundelization, you just export the > > main packages and not the impl ones. > > > > Julien > >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
