On 12 Feb 2008, at 05:45, Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Not much, but I don't think any scheme will stop that. If the coder
thought that the function was appropriate then they will code it no
matter what. If the constant they need is not available (e.g. not
public), then they will simply make a local definition of it.
There's a patch out there for Derby which creates a new service
level api and it includes an implementation class (o.a.d.*.impl.*)
from a higher level module. So all the code was correctly laid out,
but still the modularity would be broken.
It's more creating an understanding of modularity.
Agreed. Maintaining modularity requires constant policing :-(
What are your thoughts on DERBY-3405? Some of the undesirable
interactions can be prevented using technologies such as OSGI.
Secondly, is there a reason why StoredFormatIds cannot be moved to
the reference package, seeing that it is also reference data?
Regards
Dibyendu
