Hi,
Here's my vote.
[X] +1 we should do this
[ ] -1 keep things as they are
The vote is based on my understanding of the benefits of interface-based
models as follows.
1) Better pluggability for the model implementation and loading: We can
easily generate the model and loading code using Java/XML binding frameworks
such as JAXB, SDO and XMLBeans.
2) Better relationship between model objects: One java class can implement
multiple interfaces, for example, we can use "Extensible" interface to
represent the SCDL extensibilities and "Promotable" to represent models
eligible for promotion.
3) Better isolation for dependencies: Other modules only have to depend on
the model interfaces for compilation. We don't have to release the model
interfaces if we just have to fix issues in the implementation classes
without breaking the contract.
4) Simpler interface-based mocking for unit tests
5) Other projects use interface-based modeling such as Axiom, DOM, WSDL4J
and Woden
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:23 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Rewrite kernel model to be based on interfaces
The current model is based on simple POJOs. Sebastien has proposed
rewriting the configuration model to be based on interfaces with separate
implementation and factory classes. This will have a major impact on the
kernel code and all extensions. This vote is not about what is in the
model, it's is about how the model itself is implemented.
[ ] +1 we should do this
[ ] -1 keep things as they are
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
