cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Poetz <reinh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Vote] Marking internal classes
Date Sun, 18 Jul 2004 15:02:38 GMT
Unico Hommes wrote:

> Guido Casper wrote:
>
>> Unico Hommes wrote:
>>
>>> Guido Casper wrote:
>>>
>>>> Guido Casper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In all other situations, Carsten is right - this might cause 
>>>>>> backward incompatibility. This is important for user-facing 
>>>>>> classes. Should we start marking classes as internal, like 
>>>>>> "<b>INTERNAL!!!</b>" in javadoc or some such?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What about introducing @cocoon.usage tags I proposed a while ago 
>>>>> like:
>>>>> @cocoon.usage published
>>>>>
>>>>> or:
>>>>> @cocoon.usage flowscript
>>>>>
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> This might someday also be used to generate separate Javadocs for 
>>>>> different APIs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hm, noone (but me :-) seems to like the idea.
>>>>
>>>> So maybe it's a good idea to first have a quick vote about whether 
>>>> to mark internal classes as such or to mark "published 
>>>> classes/interfaces" as such (and then decide how to mark them).
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry, I think I was not clear (my fault). I intended the vote to be 
>> about marking (like within javadocs) either:
>> -internal classes
>> or (the opposite):
>> -published classes
>>
>> The first is what Vadim suggested and most simple to do (there are 
>> just a few internal classes).
>>
>> The latter opens the door to further classify classes/interfaces.
>>
>
> OK, I get it now. Let's start with marking internal classes then. This 
> is what is needed most ATM in order to allow the cocoon internals to 
> more freely evolve.


+1

-- 
Reinhard


Mime
View raw message