its as good of a time as any :)
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, > I'll start local branch, create a jira and push a patch there as a strawman. > > Is now a good time ? Thinking of limiting it to social-api first. > > Ian > > On 22 Jul 2008, at 05:49, Robert Evans wrote: > >> It seems like a good idea if done tastefully :-) and we are probably >> ready for a cleanup of that code too. >> >> Bob >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am wondering if we should have better package separation between the >>>> Impl's and API's ? >>>> >>>> eg >>>> ActivityService, PersonService and the other service API's are in the >>>> same >>>> package as the Handlers etc >>>> >>>> Activity is in the same package as ActivityImpl. >>>> >>>> why does it matter ? >>>> >>>> Here are some IMHO's >>>> >>>> 1. For those implementing the API's and doing integration is identifies >>>> the >>>> parts they need to implement. >>>> 2. It makes the bindings clearer for those inside the core, and >>>> encourages >>>> binding to interface where practical. >>>> 3. If bundling in OSGi or some other packager it makes it easier to >>>> export >>>> the right API's to the rest of the container. >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>>> (Happy to do the refractor as necessary, but don't want to tread on toes >>>> and disrupt other work) >>> >>> >>> I agree 100% -- we should have clearly defined public API in all areas, >>> so >>> that we know what we're committing to when we roll out the 1.0 release. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Ian >>>> >>> > >
