----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Don't you expect some common code to exist in each handler?
>
> I did, however, raise this issue with Peter. What Peter has said is that
he
> doesn't see a need for it in the current code, and is perfectly
willing to
> add it when it becomes useful.
It looks like
- There is no loss in keeping BaseHandler except for cleanup value.
- I think it is going to be useful as there will be common code in handlers
that would be best handled in base class. There have been patches/cleanups
proposed but not committed that you pointed out. There may be more in
future.
Why don't you leave BaseHandler where it is for now and see if there are
some patterns across handlers that can be refactored into base.
> Since we don't have this code in the CVS, all I'm doing is kibbitzing with
> you and Peter on each of your private builds, and testing.
Thanks Noel. Appreciate it very much.
One could checkin proposals under the proposals area, but we don't seem to
be doing that very much.
> I don't think that this particular issue is a reason to hold up code
> release, do you?
This reason is a complete distraction. I don't see a big gain in this is
cleanup. My concern is that it reduces potential value and I have been a
unconfortable with us doing larger than need be changes. Do you or Peter
really care about this one ? I could enumerate some reuse ideas and we could
talk long about it, but I would prefer not to do it in this thread.
Harmeet
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
