[seam-dev] Meeting 2011-08-17

[Pete Muir]

On 17 Aug 2011, at 20:41, Dan Allen wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 23:12, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 17/08/11 13:05, Dan Allen wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 22:57, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak at redhat.com> 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.

I assume these are utility methods? In which case just make them non-static and injectable beans?