I would like to propose then that we make these a next release issue, and I'll open a JIRA for that.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Michael Elman<[email protected]> wrote: > Originally DeploymentConfiguration was designed to be public, but I > became kinda huge and finally it has found itself in the internal. > So currently there is no way to add user handlers without using inner apis. > I think we should create a simplified API for adding handlers. > Regarding MessageContext/RuntimeContext, they both should be public. > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Bryant Luk<[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I like the way that the handler chain works today. However it can be >> cumbersome for users to understand how to create their own user >> handler. One of the potential advantages of Wink is to make the >> handler chain easier to customize. >> >> Is there any issue with exposing DeploymentConfiguration and >> RuntimeContext as public (JavaDoc'ed) APIs? >> >> DeploymentConfiguration is already talked about today inside the >> developer's guide. I don't think it makes much sense unless the API >> was made "public" and JavaDoced. >> >> MessageContext is already a public API and it inherits from >> RuntimeContext which is a "private" API. I imagine any handler would >> use the RuntimeContext APIs. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> -- >> >> - Bryant Luk >> > -- - Bryant Luk
