On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 23:12, Shane Bryzak <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 17/08/11 13:05, Dan Allen wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 22:57, Shane Bryzak <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Of course, but we break that rule. Solder is one example, there's >> multiple utility classes in the implementation that are required to compile >> other modules. >> > > I consider that a bug (or a work in progress, depending on how you look > at it). > > > George suggested that we make solder a single jar, and to me it makes sense > considering it's a set of utility features, and it would solve this problem. > I don't agree. Solder is not just utility classes. It has very clear APIs and implementations in some places. There is quite a lot of implementation detail, in fact, to implement things like the service handler and the generic beans. I am okay with moving more of the utility classes into the API, if they truly are utility APIs. Combining it all is just giving up on good design, IMO. -Dan -- Dan Allen Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action Registered Linux User #231597 http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
_______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
