openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Patrick Linskey" <plins...@gmail.com>
Subject API discussion
Date Tue, 07 Aug 2007 20:44:37 GMT
Hi,

In the meeting today, we discussed API and SPI compatibility. We
covered a lot of ground, and I expect that we'll see a few email
threads coming out of the discussion.

To get started, I'd like to go over what we discussed about APIs first:

- OpenJPA has a set of published developer-centric interfaces.

- These interfaces are relatively loosely-defined

- Our users would benefit from a more rigorously-defined set of APIs

- It is possible to traverse past the "published interface" set pretty
easily, since some of the published interfaces return types that are
not themselves published, or require arguments from classes that are
not published

During the meeting, we discussed the following options for addressing
the above points:

1. Review which classes are marked as @published, and change the build
process to build an API jar based on scanning source for @published
tags. This would have minimal impact on current users, but would be
less-rigorous and would not allow OSGi enforcement of API boundaries.

2. Break the openjpa-persistence and openjpa-persistence-jdbc modules
into separate modules for API and SPI. This would require repackaging
the current impl classes (EntityManagerImpl etc.) into a new
sub-package, in order to work with the OSGi model (it is my
understanding that OSGi does not allow multiple bundles (jars) to
contribute to the same package), but would provide strong compile-time
guarantees and a more formal contract.

Let's discuss which route we want to take to improve our API definitions.

-Patrick

-- 
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907

Mime
View raw message