That sounds good to me. So in your opinion there's no need to have a common impl library shared by the different implementations (this would be a good thing)?
On 16/08/11 00:41, Cody Lerum wrote: > The layout is something I am definitely on board with changing. It > just kind of sprawled over time after getting opinions on layout from > others. There the bulk of everything is the seam mail "core" and then > there is an impl for each of the template engines supported. > > It is probably possible to just have a api and impl as the specific > template impls (FreeMarkerTemplate, VelocityTemplate, RenderTemplate) > should only throw a NoClassDefFoundError if someone tries to use them > and doesn't include the engine in their pom...which could be > documented in the ref docs. > > Thoughts? > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Shane Bryzak<[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Cody, >> >> I've just spent some time going over Seam Mail and preparing it for the >> release, however I've discovered a number of items that I think still need >> some work before it can go out: >> >> 1) Seam mail core - I think that the core module should be removed and this >> should just become seam-mail-api, and (possibly, I'll get back to this >> shortly) seam-mail (the implementation). This would bring the module into >> conformity with other modules that follow a similar structure of one api, >> multiple implementations. >> >> 2) Evaluate whether the sub-module currently called seam-module-core-impl is >> necessary. It seems to me that this contains classes that the user might >> use directly, in which case they should go into the API module. If they are >> classes that don't actually belong in the API, then maybe a submodule called >> seam-mail-common might make more sense if they are implementation classes >> common to both the Velocity and Freemarker implementations. >> >> 3) The implementations need a minor restructure - the impl directory in both >> the Freemarker and Velocity implementations is redundant, these submodules >> can go directly in their respective sub-dirs. Also, the artifacts should be >> renamed to seam-mail-freemarker and seam-mail-velocity. >> >> 4) The seam-render sub-module. What is this for exactly? It only contains >> one class, RenderTemplate - can this go into the impl or seam-mail-common >> perhaps? >> >> 5) The distribution is broken. Running mvn clean install -Drelease produces >> a distribution archive that seems to be missing a whole bunch of stuff, >> including the actual project artifacts. >> >> If anyone is able to help Cody out with these items it would be greatly >> appreciated, as I know he little spare time to spend on the mail module at >> the moment. Likewise, I have my hands tied up with the release right now so >> if we're going to get the mail module into the 3.1.0.Beta1 release then >> we'll need a kind volunteer to help out with it. >> >> Thanks, >> Shane >> > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev _______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
