deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Porter <lightguard...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Please review DELTASPIKE-45
Date Sat, 07 Jan 2012 21:23:11 GMT
Thought about that route. Not 100% sure I like it, but it works. Also thought about putting
stuff in the spi, but they're not really spi classes either. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 7, 2012, at 13:55, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi jason,
> 
> the only alternative which comes to my mind right now is to move the impl
> classes to the impl module and to introduce e.g.:
> org.apache.deltaspike.core.spi.metadata.AnnotatedTypeBuilderData and
> AnnotatedTypeBuilder
> just loads the impl via the low-level config mechanism (which will be
> discussed soon).
> 
> regards,
> gerhard
> 
> 
> 
> 2012/1/7 Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
> 
>> I have the classes all checked into my branch [1]. Please review. I know
>> many of them need Javadoc, so you can forget that part. Mainly the
>> AnnotatedTypeBuilder needed many classes that were in Solder Impl. As I
>> believe AnnotatedTypeBuilder is pretty helpful for everyone doing CDI
>> Extension development I put them all in api, so we'll have some *Impl
>> classes in api. If everyone is okay with that, great. Otherwise we may need
>> to find a new place to put them as we can't put them in impl and keep
>> AnnotatedTypeBuilder in api.
>> 
>> [1] https://github.com/LightGuard/incubator-deltaspike/tree/DELTASPIKE-45
>> 
>> --
>> Jason Porter
>> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>> 
>> Software Engineer
>> Open Source Advocate
>> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>> 
>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>> 

Mime
View raw message