This one looks good to me..

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now that I gave it some thought, I actually like the idea of a system modular 
> by default, but including cayenne-all.jar on top of that. It has none of the 
> drawbacks of our old “synthetic” cayenne-server and cayenne-client. More 
> practically, turns out that cleanly splitting the core and server classes is 
> much more effort than I am ready to undertake now. So we ended up with these 
> modules:
>
>  cayenne-di.jar
>  cayenne-server.jar => cayenne-di
>  cayenne-client.jar => cayenne-di, cayenne-server
>
> I guess I’ll leave it at that until a later time when we can cut smaller 
> modules out of cayenne-server.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 2013, at 12:27 AM, Adrian A. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> 1. Monolithic cayenne.jar for regular apps, for ROP clients, for 
>>>> CayenneModeler
>>>> 2. Partial modularity - Client/server split between the modules, with 
>>>> separate DI and backend-indepdendent “core” :
>>>> ...
>>>> Anyways, these are our options… Feel free to comment, while I continue my 
>>>> refactoring.
>>> What about offering both? The modules, but also a "cayenne-all.jar"
>>> (or simply "cayenne.jar") ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Adrian
>>
>> This will take us back to aggregation of multiple modules into one. It was 
>> not a pretty picture, so now I am *hoping* we can align the source modules 
>> with the binaries that we release. However this can be an option for 
>> non-maven users I guess.
>>
>> A.
>

Reply via email to