On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:00 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 12:03 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote: >> On 10/10/2012 04:30 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: >>> Hi Ludovic, >>> >>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Ludovic Dubost <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Why would script services be internal ? They should have a stable API >>>> shouldn't they ? >>> Yes, I agree, each Script Service should define an interface and >>> implement it in addition to implementing ScriptService. >>> >>> We've been lazy and we should fix this as otherwise CLIRR won't let us >>> know when we break scripting APIs. >> >> Wouln't it be good to start distinguish between API and SPI, and have a >> different set of CLIRR rules for each type ? >> >> For instance, I don't see a big benefit in not allowing new methods in >> such script services interfaces. In my opinion those are not designed or >> intended to be extended or implemented by third parties anyway. >> So IMO going through a VOTE everytime one adds a new method to a script >> service is too constraining for little value. >> >> My 2 cents >> Jerome > > Totally agree. Yes we can start brainstorming about it. It's a lot of work. We need to define precisely what we call SPI and what we call API and then define rules for SPI package name (probably needs "spi" in the package name or api needs to be put in an "api" package name), need to think about migration from what we have to the target, etc. > > One other thing that bugs me is that a component that implements two roles > will have two instances, and this makes it harder to have a class that > implements both ScriptService and a specific role for that component. Yes but that's not needed. The script service only needs to implement 1 component role, the interface doesn't have to be a role. Thanks -Vincent >>>> Ludovic >>>> >>>> 2012/10/10 Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Ludovic Dubost <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I found an issue with the maven project to generate the javadocs for >>>>>> SRD. Apparently all the internal packages are ignored. >>> This is normal and good. We don't want to show these to the user. >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>>>> This is no necessarly a problem unless we want them in the javadocs. >>>>>> Now there is a problem as some APIs are in internal, which does not >>>>>> seem normal. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is the case of: >>>>>> >>>>>> org.xwiki.officeimporter.internal.script.OfficeImporterScriptService >>>>>> >>>>> org.xwiki.officeimporter.internal.openoffice.script.OpenOfficeManagerScriptService >>>>> >>>>>> org.xwiki.office.viewer.internal.DefaultOfficeViewerScriptService >>>>> Most of our script services are internal. For the office module I need >>>>> to create a single script service (hint=office) with 3 methods >>>>> getImporter(), getManager() and getViewer(). >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Marius >>>>> >>>>>> Until we find a solution i've reverted to the javadocs manually >>>>>> generated (without the maven project). >>>>>> >>>>>> Ludovic _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
