Yes this is the other benefit to abstracting an API. You can mock test with the API or provide a drop in replacement if once exists. IE I do not integration tests Java projects using mysql, I use h2 or derby.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Shankar Venkataraman < shankarvenkataraman...@gmail.com> wrote: > In addition, if the LGPL (or a less open licensing) dependency makes it > hard to set up and run automated tests on an ongoing basis, it does nullify > the spirit of the one release doctrine. To honor the doctrine may lead to > painful refactoring, but I do think it is essential for Toree to be truly > open. > > Shankar > > > > On Fri, 20 May 2016 at 09:42 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 5/20/16, 9:32 AM, "Edward Capriolo" <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >Yes if you are using a feature specific to a specific product it is > > >obvious > > >even if you wrap cruft around it. however when I see something that uses > > >"rabbit mq" i generally think to wrap an interface around it so I can > > >replace with Apache Kafka :).I am wondering if the same be done here. > > > > Interface abstraction might be a good engineering design decision, but it > > won't affect the perceived LPGL dependency if a significant number of > your > > users must bring down an LPGL dependency in order to have a satisfactory > > solution. It isn't whether they "can" replace RabbitMQ with Apache > Kafka, > > it is whether they will. > > > > -Alex > > > > >
