Yes we do, but these are reusable library types, creating interfaces is quite logical. Having a class named Person with just contact details and having to write an interface just to be able to store that in a queue is excessing imho.
On 20 May 2010, at 16:29, Steve Harris wrote: > Isn't this what we do to build the terracotta products? > > On May 20, 2010, at 5:19 AM, Geert Bevin wrote: > >>>> * require app devs to bundle their custom types in a dedicated jar also >>>> and to only reference them through interfaces, allow us to use the same >>>> approach as the one we're currently using >>> >>> I like one. It allows someone to leverage identity in there framework but >>> keeps it protected from leaking out to the user of the framework >> >> I'm wondering how useful this is really going to be, are developers really >> going to want to write interfaces for all the types they use within express? >> Are they going to be able to hand over the lifecycle management (ie. not use >> DI etc). Those seem like pretty counter-intuitive restrictions to me that I >> personally wouldn't be happy about if they would be imposed on me. -- Geert Bevin Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list tc-dev@lists.terracotta.org http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
