You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to oak-issues@jackrabbit.apache.org by "Thomas Mueller (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2017/06/30 07:23:00 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6407) Refactor oak.spi.query into a
separate module/bundle
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6407?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16069636#comment-16069636 ]
Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-6407:
-------------------------------------
I'm not against doing this, but would like to understand the reasons.
> to prevent the introduction of bogus cycles
Which ones?
> and odd package exports in the future
Which ones?
What does it solve / prevent exactly, and how?
Why does org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.query need to be moved to a new project, but not for example org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.security?
Why do oak-jcr, oak-run, oak-authorization-cug, oak-store-composite,... need a direct dependency? Should this not be indirectly over oak-lucene?
If we move those classes, why does oak-lucene still depends on oak-core? It would be nice if oak-lucene just depends on this (and possibly other) spi projects.
> Refactor oak.spi.query into a separate module/bundle
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-6407
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6407
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core, query
> Reporter: angela
> Assignee: angela
> Labels: modularization
> Attachments: OAK-6407.patch
>
>
> now that OAK-6304 and OAK-6355 have been resolved, i would like to suggest that we move the _o.a.j.oak.spi.query_ code base into a separate module/bundle in order to prevent the introduction of bogus cycles and odd package exports in the future.
> [~tmueller], patch will follow asap.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)