Dan Price wrote:
> On Thu 11 Sep 2008 at 10:29AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
>> I disagree.  However, you're free to make it part of the API if you 
>> think it needs to be.  I don't think special status needs to be given 
>> for code that lives in our gate.
> 
> When I was a kid I lived in the same house as my parents, but that
> didn't confer upon me the right to drive my Mom's car or to use my Dad's
> power tools.
> 
> API boundaries help to make code more sane regardless of colocation
> within a gate.
> 
> Our current codebase has quite a number of places where people have
> abused existing interfaces because they could.  This has several
> effects.  Code becomes more brittle.  It's harder to change code
> because consumers are depending upon e.g. side effects of the code.
> It's harder to learn and reason about the architecture.
> 
> And given the dearth of refactoring and good code search tools for
> python, it can be, in my experience, very daunting to track down all
> of the consumers of a given API.
> 
> So, I say to Brock: Keep making an API.  You're on the right track.

I was just pointing out that code in our gate should remain working.  I 
had a much longer writeup where I essentially said what you said above.

I just strongly disagreed with the reasoning that only 
"specially-blessed" code could be used by the clients in our gate.

-- 
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to