The problem with "ExtendedAsset" is that in Tapestry 5.2 I might have to add "SuperExtendedAsset" or something. I'd rather see Asset3!
The number on the end is ugly, but reflects the evolution of the framework. There's also a ModuleDef2 and a ServiceDef2 now. This is the best approach to backwards compatibility. For service interfaces that are not expected to be extended by the user, just injected, I'm more willing to break "perfect" backwards compatibility and just introduce a new method. It's a judgment call. On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Massimo Lusetti <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Andreas Andreou <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I feel there should be a better name for this. I could propose one >> ExtendedAsset or VariableAsset but i dont know if more methods will >> end up there... Is Asset2 meant to be directly used by users? > > It's not 'internal' so i guess yes. > > -- > Massimo > http://meridio.blogspot.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
