[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-7168?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16350443#comment-16350443
 ] 

Timothee Maret commented on SLING-7168:
---------------------------------------

Thanks [~simone.tripodi] for your review!

I agree with you, we could move APIs in the api bundle!
However, IMO, avoiding to do so would give us some advantages when 
maintaining/evolving the "useable API" (currently in the api bundle) and the 
"technical API" (currently in the core bundle).

1. Leaving the technical APIs aside allows to provide an entirely different 
implementation of the useable API
2. It is easy, using the api controller, to restrict access to a customer to 
the technical APIs yet keep the useable API accessible. An API not accessible 
to customers, is easier to evolve.

As we are already exporting technical API from the core bundle, we would not 
turn the existing design upside down.

> Allow to implement custom distribution agents/queues
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SLING-7168
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-7168
>             Project: Sling
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Content Distribution
>    Affects Versions: Content Distribution Core 0.2.8
>            Reporter: Timothee Maret
>            Assignee: Timothee Maret
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: Content Distribution Core 0.2.12, Content Distribution 
> API 0.4.0
>
>
> Currently, it is not possible to implements distribution agents and queues, 
> implemented in another bundle than the {{org.apache.sling.distribution.core}} 
> bundle.
> Implementing a custom distribution agent outside of the 
> {{org.apache.sling.distribution.core}} bundle is useful when leveraging an 
> ad-hoc communication layer.
> This issue is about allowing to plug an external distribution agent/queue 
> provided via a separate bundle.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to