Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Jan 26, 2008 4:48 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Jan 24, 2008 10:51 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's why I think config.xml and storage compatibility should be a
greater priority compared to API stability.
JAMES needs more active developers. releasing unstable APIs damages
the development ecology.
It's clear we have different opinions on this.
IMHO most JAMES developers are JAMES users that knows JAVA and in a
given point in time decide they want to start writing some Mailets, and
then move writing some service and then start hacking the core, and
become more involved in the developers community.
exactly :-)
mailet authors should be able to rely on a stable set of basic
exterior service APIs. breaking into finely grained components is
great but it creates a lot of interior interfaces to allow
implementations to be extended. it isn't clear which APIs are intended
for mailet and protocol developers, and which are interior APIs aimed
at extenders of a particular backend implementation.
- robert
AFAIK only Mailet API are intended for mailet developers, now.
And we never exposed "public" protocol APIs.
Only SIMPLE mailets can be written using public APIs. Everything else,
is JAMES Server core hacking (access the ServiceManager via a context
lookup and know what is declared in the assembly).
Long before I joined this project I know that JAMES PMC evaluated the
possibility to put repositories knowledge in the mailet apis and some
more service, but I think it never landed the official code. I don't
know why.
IMHO internal apis can be made public only when we used it for a while
and we are satisfied with them to say that we won't change them for a
while. This is not the case of current and past internal interfaces.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
