The following comment has been added to this issue:
Author: Ate Douma
Created: Wed, 19 May 2004 8:48 AM
Body:
While I'm +1 on moving the interfaces out from the component implementations, I'm not
so sure about moving them into commons.
As I see it, there are currently two different usages of the commons. One is for
building *on top of* J2 specific features like the ServletPortlet or the
StrutsServletContextProviderImpl.
The other is for providing interfaces and base classes for assembling and access to
the J2 core itself.
>From a formal point I don't like it when portlet developers which need only access to
>the J2 specific features for building *on top of* J2 also import all kinds of core
>features which are not their concern. I'd rather see those classes be stored in a
>separate J2 "core" (or whatever).
For now, I'd say move the interfaces to commons but I also would like to discuss if
the "core" features aren't better of in a separate core subproject (or whatever it
should be called).
Regards,
Ate
---------------------------------------------------------------------
View this comment:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JS2-30?page=comments#action_35626
---------------------------------------------------------------------
View the issue:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JS2-30
Here is an overview of the issue:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JS2-30
Summary: Create a Jetspeed 2 "core" sub project
Type: Task
Status: Open
Priority: Major
Project: Jetspeed 2
Components:
Components Core
Versions:
2.0-a1
Assignee: Scott T Weaver
Reporter: Scott T Weaver
Created: Wed, 19 May 2004 8:15 AM
Updated: Wed, 19 May 2004 8:48 AM
Description:
What I had started doing in my branch was moving interfaces out of the component
implementations and portal/ and into commons. This makes it easier to test components
that may access these other interfaces without having to specifically depend on the
component implementation. This also makes our code more modular and extensible. Say,
for example, some one wants to implement a persistence store using Hibernate. As the
current source layout is set up, the user would have a dependency on the the current
persistence store implementation built with OJB because that is where the interfaces
are leading them to having to have ALL the dependencies OJB required also. By moving
all the persistence store interfaces up into commons, all the developer needs as
dependency is the jetspeed 2 commons jar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
JIRA INFORMATION:
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
