On 6/12/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Robert,
hi stefano I see you already noticed the move was not pleasing... but... can you
explain why we need to move an api for our core library in an imap package?
the short answer is that there's a dependency i originally missed between the User interface and ImapSession the long answer is that i'm concerned at the level of divergence between the IMAP branch and trunk I would avoid to move core stuff in imap dependencies at all as imap
should be optional.
i agree moving User into the imap-api was the quickest way for me to complete the modularisation in the branch without resolving my design dilemmas about User If this is only a limit of the ant build (the
api-library-function-deployment layer) I would prefer to introduce another layer or an hack (like I did for the mailet-api in past) in the build system instead of having such a dependency on imap-api for the whole project.
it's not a limitation of the build system so much as a limitation of the way that james is factored ATM it's easy to choose different rules - but there are reasons why i chose to play by these rules. playing by these rules forces me to factor interfaces and implementations cleanly. i hope that this will make component inter-relationships more obvious so that they are easier to comprehend and discuss. My concern are related to the "long run". If this is few weeks then
ignore my comment, otherwise we should find a different solution.
don't worry - this should be just a temporary solution - robert
