I didn't vote on any of this at the time because my votes then would all have been +0 or -1 and I didn't want to stop anyone from doing anything that would move James forwards.
Furthermore I think it was too much to decide in one go so I just tuned out of it. I still think it is too much for one thread to consider. But if you insist... On 10/28/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Danny Angus wrote: ----- B1. Remove Avalon from "API Components"
So I think we all agree on this. ------- E. Specific API Components issues: E1. Use JNDI to lookup datasources
+1 to making them available through JNDI But... I don't think they should be *required* just available where they exist.
E2. Use JNDI to lookup users/mail repositories, the store and any other James component.
-1 repositories should be made available by the api directly
E3. Add datasource, repositories, store and any other used service to the MailetContext API (this also mean adding the interfaces for this objects to the Mailet APIs)
+0.5 *some* of these, which represent first class entities in the model should, but peripheral services need a more flexible approach (JNDI and an extension mechanism perhaps) I think I'm in agreement with Noel.
E4. Use Dependency Injection (setter based, constructor based, enabling interfaces, service locator injection) to automatically satisfy components dependencies.
I think this is only relevant to James implementation, -1 to imposing too much IoC on mailets
E5. Keep the ServiceManager as a property stored in the MailetContext.
-1
As you can see we have topics where it seems there is consensus (remove ServiceManager from the MailetContext and Remove Avalon from "API Components") and others where we have opposite preferences. Almost every other question received a bunch of +1 but at least a -1: so you know this is really a minefield.
I've always known that, and have been thinking about this for more years than you could guess! I don't think my approach in the sandbox is going against the consensus.
That said I really appreciate your effort on this issue: all this text is just to update you on what happened in the months you were more busy and what informations I collected about this issue.
I've been reading all the mail, but thanks anyway. d.
