'Core' means that this are all things which will not only run in Java EE but also in Java SE. This includes end-user functionality as well as Extension programmer tools. We just need to put them into different packages. Core just means that we don't force any additional dependencies on our users.
The reason I don't like to split those things out into own jars is that it soon gets really complicated to get the modularity right without restricting ourselfs too much. LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jason Porter <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 11:07 PM > Subject: Re: [jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-129) re-visit visibility of > AnnotationBuilder, ImmutableInjectionPoint, InjectableMethod and > ParameterValueRedefiner > > It could, I sort of envisioned that's what Core was for. > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 15:01, Matt Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Could it be that certain classes belong in some DS artifact that is >> meant to serve as a toolbox for extension authors, then? >> >> Matt >> >> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Jason Porter > <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > For now, the wiki is as good as anywhere else. >> > >> > Sent from my iPhone >> > >> > On Mar 25, 2012, at 12:03, Pete Muir <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Ok, I see that they are not used. So, what is the objection to > these >> classes? No clear use case? If so, where do I document the use cases? >> >> >> >> IMO they are all useful things for extension authors. >> >> >> >> On 25 Mar 2012, at 18:15, Pete Muir wrote: >> >> >> >>> Maybe this is just a cultural mismatch. Do Apache projects > expect >> people to rely on the "API" packages and Implementation packages > when >> writing code? >> >>> >> >>> Anyway, this goes back to my original question. How do you > reduce the >> visibility of these classes without affecting the API. Other classes expose >> them via methods, so it's not as simple as "just reduce the > visibility"... >> >>> >> >>> On 25 Mar 2012, at 18:12, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> imo they shouldn't be part of the api and i'm not > sure if they fit in >> the >> >>>> spi package, because you don't need them to customize > deltaspike. >> >>>> they are just helpers which are even quite special for > extensions >> authors. >> >>>> >> >>>> regards, >> >>>> gerhard >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> 2012/3/25 Pete Muir <[email protected]> >> >>>> >> >>>>> Yes, this is definitely all squarely aimed at > extension authors and >> not >> >>>>> end user apps IMO. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 25 Mar 2012, at 18:03, Mark Struberg wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> Is this useful for Extension implementers? If so > we might think >> about >> >>>>> putting them into spi packages? >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> LieGrue, >> >>>>>> strub >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>>>>>> From: Pete Muir <[email protected]> >> >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >> >>>>>>> Cc: >> >>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 6:36 PM >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jira] [Created] (DELTASPIKE-129) > re-visit visibility >> of >> >>>>> AnnotationBuilder, ImmutableInjectionPoint, > InjectableMethod and >> >>>>> ParameterValueRedefiner >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2012, at 17:30, Gerhard Petracek > wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> hi pete, >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> that would be possible e.g. with > AnnotationBuilder. however, it >> isn't >> >>>>>>>> possible with all of them. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Why? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> -> we already moved internal helpers to >> >>>>>>>> org.apache.deltaspike.core.util >> >>>>>>>>> if< we need them in the api-module. >> >>>>>>>> they might not provide a stable api (over > time) or are quite >> special. >> >>>>>>>> we moved them there to remove the > visibility via an organizational >> >>>>>>> approach. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> I have no problem with this approach. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Perhaps you could expand on what you mean here > then? Do you mean >> extract >> >>>>>>> interfaces from these classes and move the > implementation to core? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> I can't see how you can reduce the > visibility without changing the >> API? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> regards, >> >>>>>>>> gerhard >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> 2012/3/25 Pete Muir > <[email protected]> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I assume you mean the visibility of > the constructors of >> >>>>>>> AnnotationBuilder, >> >>>>>>>>> ImmutableInjectioPoint, > InjectableMethod, and ParameterValue? >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Begin forwarded message: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> From: "Gerhard Petracek > (Created) (JIRA)" >> >>>>>>> <[email protected]> >> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [jira] [Created] > (DELTASPIKE-129) re-visit visibility >> of >> >>>>>>>>> AnnotationBuilder, > ImmutableInjectionPoint, InjectableMethod and >> >>>>>>>>> ParameterValueRedefiner >> >>>>>>>>>> Date: 25 March 2012 16:39:27 > GMT+01:00 >> >>>>>>>>>> To: > [email protected] >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> re-visit visibility of > AnnotationBuilder, >> ImmutableInjectionPoint, >> >>>>>>>>> InjectableMethod and > ParameterValueRedefiner >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Key: DELTASPIKE-129 >> >>>>>>>>>> URL: >> >>>>>>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-129 >> >>>>>>>>>> Project: DeltaSpike >> >>>>>>>>>> Issue Type: Task >> >>>>>>>>>> Components: Core >> >>>>>>>>>> Affects Versions: 0.1-incubating >> >>>>>>>>>> Reporter: Gerhard Petracek >> >>>>>>>>>> Assignee: Jason Porter >> >>>>>>>>>> Fix For: 0.2-incubating >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> ... since those classes aren't > intended to be used by users, we >> >>>>>>> should >> >>>>>>>>> re-visit them. >> >>>>>>>>>> if we can't keep them > package-private, we could move them to >> >>>>>>> the >> >>>>>>>>> util-package (like we did with > ClassDeactivation now >> >>>>>>> ClassDeactivationUtils) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> -- >> >>>>>>>>>> This message is automatically > generated by JIRA. >> >>>>>>>>>> If you think it was sent > incorrectly, please contact your JIRA >> >>>>>>>>> administrators: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa >> >>>>>>>>>> For more information on JIRA, see: >> >>>>>>>>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Jason Porter > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp > > Software Engineer > Open Source Advocate > Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling > > PGP key id: 926CCFF5 > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu >
