On Mar 8, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Hyrum K. Wright > <[email protected]> wrote: >> This means we now need to keep these constructors around for backward >> compat, yes? >> >> (Even in cases where the constructor explicitly says something like "This >> constructor should only > be called from JNI code."?) > > These classes bleed into the ISVNClient interface so they are > effectively public and ought to be usable by anyone providing an > implementation of the interface. Another way to approach this would > be to create additional interfaces for anything that is exposed > directly or indirectly via ISVNClient and move all of our > implementation classes into a package names "internal". Then we only > need to version the interface methods and anyone that uses the > internal implementation is on their own.
Hmm, yeah. I realize the classes are public, but I guess I always envisioned most of these as "output" parameters which should only be constructed by the internals of JavaHL. Apparently that's not a very accurate vision anymore. The idea of using interfaces seems like the typical Java solution to this type of question, but it also seems like a lot of work. Using interfaces within interfaces does feel like the cleaner solution, though. -Hyrum
