On 8/12/08, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well done, and thanks for the clear update, this was good to read. :-) > i've just got the code and will have a look at it later, but it sounds > like a good job.
+1 - Robert > > On 8/11/08, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: >>> I completed my first step in "repackaging" and "remoduling" server.trunk >>> code. >>> It is far from being perfect, but at least a first goal is achieved. >>> Now no package belong to 2 modules considering -util, -api and -library >>> modules. >>> [...] >>> The next steps (as soon as I find the cycles) are: >>> 1. core-library: split it into multiple modules, repackage content to >>> avoid use of the "generic" packages. >>> 2. take care of packages in functions: they must not reuse packages >>> already used by api/util/libraries. >> >> Here we are at the end of my second day on this "sprint". >> >> I moved around some more code and main changes are: >> >> A. Packages should no more be repeated in api/libraries/util. >> >> B. No package used by api/libraries/util is used in functions (A+B means >> that I'm not sure if we have functions using the same packages) >> >> C. Renamed mailnotification-util to javamail-util (at the end of the 2 >> days refactoring it made more sense because of dependencies/content). >> >> D. Introduced core-api to contain basic service interfaces >> (org.apache.james.services) from core-library. (I also moved some of >> org.apache.james.services to functions when they were not used by other >> modules). >> >> E. Introduced a management-library module to contain management stuff >> (after I refactored code to be selfcontained in that package). Only >> RemoteManager-function currently depends on this. >> >> F. Introduced a core-function module to host all of the code from >> core-library that was not used by other functions and reduce the size of >> this core-library as it already is the most used dependency. >> >> I don't plan further major changes after this one, but I have to take >> the time to review the resulting structure with my tools. >> >> There are still some utilities in core-library that should be checked. >> I still have issues with some module "granularization" but I can't see a >> better solution now. The main goal of this was packages separation and >> smaller core-library. >> >> Currently hudson fail because of svn issues I have to investigate. I'm >> not sure if the ant/m2 builds works now and if the resulting binary >> works. I'm testing this now. >> >> I don't know what's next.. I have to relax and look at the "new" tree >> after cooling down. >> >> Please review and tell if you see improvement over the previous tree or >> you prefer to revert this 2 days big-bang. >> >> Stefano >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > -- > Sent from Google Mail for mobile | mobile.google.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
