Hi,

I extracted the client related parts into to ³client-api/core² modules and
updated feature branch OLINGO-564
(https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=olingo-odata4.git;a=shortlog;h
=refs/heads/OLINGO-564).

As always: Feedback is welcome  ;o)

Best regards, 
Michael



On 29/04/15 07:57, "Bolz, Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi Ramesh,
>
>> Suggestions 
>> 1) Is there is any strong reason to have both "common-api" and
>>"common-core". Can me move these packages into one module like
>>"common-core"? for client and server api/impl makes sense as someone
>>could provide an alternative implementation.
>
>The separation between API (³api²) and implementation (³core²) was
>intentionally that it is clearly evident which parts are ³visible² to an
>user and must be backward capable.
>In Olingo V2 this concept helped a lot to achieve that an update of the
>library does not lead to compilation errors.
>For that reason I would prefer to keep the separation.
>
>> 
>> 2) Can we rename " commons-api
>>==>org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.provider" to " commons-api
>>==>org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.csdl" or "
>>org.apache.olingo.commons.api.csdl". Same goes to
>>"edm.provider.annotation" package.
>
>I agree with your suggestion and prefer
>³org.apache.olingo.commons.api.edm.csdl².
>Furthermore I would suggest to rename
>³org.apache.olingo.commons.api.domain² to
>³org.apache.olingo.commons.api.client², or better this should be moved to
>³org.apache.olingo.client.api.domain².
>However...
>
>> 
>> 3) Next confusing part is package
>>"org.apache.olingo.commons.api.domain" package in "commons-api" and its
>>implementation in "common-core". This is parallel package what looks
>>like same/similar intentions as "org.apache.olingo.commons.api.data".
>>These are only used to serialize and deserialize content in client
>>modules. If they are only designed for client they should have been
>>(should be moved to) in the client, if not
>>"org.apache.olingo.commons.api.data" should not have existed to begin
>>with. It is quite possible I am not seeing the intent of this package
>>too, so in that case if you can explain that would be great.
>
>Šthis could be not that easy.
>As far as I knew is this ³confusing part² a (legacy) result of the merge
>of the client contribution with the server contribution.
>I will check if its possible to move the ³client-only² code from the
>³commons² into the ³client² modules.
>
>Nevertheless I would prefer to do a merge back of the current state (of
>OLINGO-564) into the master branch.
>
>Best regards,
>Michael

Reply via email to