[seam-dev] Meeting 2011-08-17

[Shane Bryzak]

On 17/08/11 13:06, Dan Allen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 23:05, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen at gmail.com 
> <mailto:dan.j.allen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 22:57, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak at redhat.com
>     <mailto: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).
>
>
> An API is an API. If it's an "internal API", then perhaps it should be 
> an SPI. Under no circumstances should we be depending on 
> implementation classes between modules. Otherwise, we are changing the 
> definition of an implementation.

We agree on this, and as far as I know (besides Solder) we conform to 
this throughout all the modules.

>
> -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
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/seam-dev/attachments/20110817/2220986c/attachment.html