Am 18.04.2002 13:46:34, schrieb Jean-Philippe Courson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Christopher Lenz wrote: [..] >For me, inclusion of user-quota-support in particular doesn't matter, >but the ability to plug, configure and use smoothly Content-Interceptors >would be great. > >I explain myself : Slide's Content-Interceptors concept is great but, >for now, not very usable ; you can't add parameters to them, they can't >throw any exceptions and they lack some methods (like >postRemoveContent). > >I think that making these generic Content-Interceptors modifications >would be painless (I've already written them) and the patches are very >small and basic so they should not add bugs. > >What is your opinion on this ? Well, I agree with your opinions here, and I'll try to find the time to review and commit your patches asap. >Regards > >JP > >ps : for more informations on proposed modifications, please see > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02876.html I've just re-read the discussion (which I didn't closely follow, originally). One point: IMHO ContentInterceptor should have been an interface from the start. As the mechanism obviously hasn't been used much (due to it's limited usability), why not make it an interface now if we're changing the API anyway ? And provide an abstract class AbstractContentInterceptor to ease implementation. Are there any good reasons ContentInterceptor isn't an interface ? Would the above be too much of a change ? -chris _______________________________________________ /=/ cmlenz at gmx.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
