[seam-dev] Meeting 2011-08-17

[Dan Allen]

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.

-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/20110817/1a54ea3b/attachment-0001.html