Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Message-ID: <4C8F5C72.6070001@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:28:50 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Emmanuel_L=E9charny?= <elecharny@apache.org>
Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org
Organization: The Apache Software Foundation
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: API / shared merge
References: <4C88F910.7010005@gmail.com>
 <AANLkTikvemB+1BLgM==3d6TJOBpLCS+y3r87oKfSC3GD@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikvemB+1BLgM==3d6TJOBpLCS+y3r87oKfSC3GD@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

  On 9/14/10 12:39 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Hi Emmanuel,
Comments inline...
>>   Hi guys,
>>
>> it seems that when I did the big modification (merging all the Messages)
>> last month, I forgot to uncomment the dsml-parser which is part of shared.
>>
>> I had it working by pointing to the ldap-api project, as it now depends on
>> it, but that was not enough to be able to build it when uncommented in the
>> shared/pom.xml file, as shared does not depend on ldap-api.
>>
>> However, in my mind, the next step was to integrate the ldap-api project
>> into shared (well, imo, shared<==>  ldap API up to a point).
>>
>>
> For history sake, note that the shared project started first as a Maven
> Module instead of a full on project at the same level as ApacheDS and
> Studio. Then we converted it into a full project as we realized we wanted to
> factor out more common code that can be reused. However originally shared
> appeared to solve some issues we were having with Maven Module dependency
> cycles.
That was back when we were using Maven 1. Right now, those cyclic 
dependencies are gone.

>
>> Here is what I suggest we do :
>> - move ldap-client into shared
>>
> Makes sense sine ldap-client will be reused (hence shared) by other projects
> like Studio and ApacheDS.

It's already done.
>> - rename shared to ldap-api
>>
> Is everything that is in shared part of the ldap-api?
Most of it.
> Also note that we
> might want a simple API jar/bundle with the public interfaces and perhaps
> without connection providers so the implementation can be swapped in and out
> as needed sort of like the JNDI provider architecture.
Absolutely. I moved out any references to MINA in shared-ldap yesterday, 
but we still have some coupling in shared-asn1-codec. We might want to 
get rid of this coupling before releasing.

At some point, we may want to use something else than MINA, or our users 
might want to do so. This was one part of the contract we wanted to 
establish with the Sun/OpenDS guys when we started working o the API, 
and I think it's still relevant.

-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L�charny
www.iktek.com