incubator-deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gerhard Petracek <>
Subject Re: Please review DELTASPIKE-45
Date Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:14:43 GMT
hi @ all,

today i reviewed it. my findings:

imo we shouldn't have public impl classes in the api module >if< we can
avoid it. i made a small refactoring to reduce the visibility of those
classes and i attached a patch which shows the suggestion at [1].

i had a short talk with pete about AnnotationRedefiner. it looks like that
it was introduced to provide an alternative syntax to the other builder
methods esp. for complex cases.
imo we should re-visit it (esp. if there are really that many cases which
really benefit from it - compared to using the other builder methods).



2012/1/7 Jason Porter <>

> 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]
> --
> Jason Porter
> Software Engineer
> Open Source Advocate
> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> PGP key available at:,

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message