Danny Angus wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > - Mailet API
> > - Handler API
> > - Common Services
> I believe that there is a place for all three of these things, and
> that the first two both depend upon the third one, but that neither
> of the first two need to be a mandatory requirement of an API which
> specifies the other one.
Exactly. :-)
> I think we're really close to agreeing that the scope of an API
> project can and possibly should include all three (I think we're
> just getting hung up on names)
Hence my repeated reference to nomenclature, and illustration of the
differences in the component lifecycles.
> I do still maintain that there are use-cases which do not include
> a requirement for implementing protocols.
> [... use cases ...]
Total agreement.
> I would be 100% in favour of developing the three API's under the
> mailet api banner, as long as it was done in a manner which clearly
> signposted the options which implementors have
Exactly. We just need to be careful to not conflate the requirements for
the different container types.
Of course, if a developer wants to intentionally embed a synchronous mailet
container as an onMessage handler, that's fine. At least two of us have
illustrated that usage in the past, and there are some use cases.
--- Noel
