Luciano Resende wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:57 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Ant,
I always thought having xxxx-xml module as a good approach, in terms of
spring I see this module as independent module without any dependencies from
spring binaries. Are we following any nomenclature to split the modules? may
be I am not aware.
+1, embedders and tolling guys such as Eclipse STP can use our modules
without any extra dependencies which is a good thing....
I think we did decide to change to the two module approach, there is no real
benefit for keeping them separate, I'll go attempt to find an email where
this was decided, (not sure how successful that will be as it was sometime
ago and might be hard to find searching for -xml).
There is no real benefit on the app development scenarios we (tuscany
developers) usually work on our day to day development tasks...
For now, as spring is already using -xml, I'd leave like this and use
another thread to come to a conclusion on this.
Luciano,
The Spring implementation-xml module is one that I propose we get rid of. It is one of my
"suspicious" ones - it contains a single class only. This seems very wasteful, as it does not
really offer much in the way of "pluggability". Putting it into the main implementation-spring
module really does simplify things in this case.
It is notable that the dependencies of the module are all already contained in the dependencies of
implementation-spring, so this will not increase coupling.
Yours, Mike.
