Fabio Mancinelli wrote: > On Jun 28, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > >>> And the calls to the access bridge are OK, since they are supposed >>> to be >>> replaced with calls to the new model once it is in place, so all the >>> code that needs access to the model *should* use the bridge. Once we >>> have the new model in place, the default bridge implementation will >>> use >>> it instead of the old core. >> When the bridge already have all needed but we are mapping more and >> more model in the bridge which is wrong IMO. >> >> I don't vote against it so if everyone is +1 go for it but i don't >> like adding temporary code when there is no good reason. >> > I take advantage of this mail in order to ask for a clarification > about this bridge-related-issues. > > The REST subsystem uses the model and the API defined in xwiki-core > and doesn't make use of the bridge at all. > > Thomas' argument explains why I did this : since I need access to the > complete XWiki API for exposing it via REST, basically I would have > had to rewrite a "duplicate" of the API in an interface (the bridge) > that is, to my understanding, temporary and that will be discarded > once a new model (and its API) will be available. > > However from what Sergiu says I understand that the bridge is there to > stay, so this invalidates my hypothesis. > > Since, at some point, we should port the REST subsystem to the "new > thing" that is independent from core, the question is: is the bridge > this "new thing" and we should enrich it to support the complete XWiki > API or we should wait for the new model in order to avoid work that > will be discarded because the bridge is going to disappear as well?
I tend to agree with Thomas: bridged code is going to be changed anyway, so for modules that are heavy consumers of the model (like the REST sub-system), I think bridging is just adding more pain, since in both cases the whole thing will be refactored with the new model. For modules that are not heavy consumers of the model, the bridge allows to not depend on xwiki-core which is desired and more elegant. I still think they should be refactored with the new model, getting rid of the bridge. At least that's how I see it. Jerome. > > Thanks, > Fabio > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
