You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to pluto-dev@portals.apache.org by Randy Watler <wa...@wispertel.net> on 2009/03/09 17:27:20 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
+1
Randy
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> I think your proposal for the package changes makes sense; once we have
> changed this, we can have a look again and see how it "feels" in reality :)
>
> Carsten
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
Posted by David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>.
On Mar 9, 2009, at 6:18 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> As indicated, I've started the package cleanup (PLUTO-537).
>
> But... while doing this, the more it becomes clear this whole SPI
> package naming really isn't that appropriate.
>
> While the SPI packaging indicates "pluggable" interfaces to be
> provided/implemented by the portal,
> in practice a large part of the Pluto provided SPI implementation
> classes really are very core/generic/standard and are unlikely to be
> (completely) replaced by an embedding portal.
> And then, some other interfaces *are* expected to be provided,
> extended or replaced by the embedding portal.
> Furthermore, some interfaces are more Object model like, while
> others clearly are services like.
>
> I'm now planning to follow the suggestion Carsten already somewhat
> made in his initial proposal, and use a much more descriptive
> packaging structure (based on the previously targeted packaging)
> which also better "aligns" with the jar "container" naming:
>
> container-api:
>
> - move o.a.p.* to o.a.p.container
> - move o.a.p.driver.* to o.a.p.container.driver
> - move.o.a.p.spi.* to o.a.p.container
> - move.o.a.p.om.portlet.* to o.a.p.container.om.portlet
> and:
> - move all o.a.p.container *services* to o.a.p.container.services
>
> container (impl):
>
> - move o.a.p.impl.* to o.a.p.container.impl
> - move o.a.p.driver.impl.* to o.a.p.container.driver.impl
> - move o.a.p.om.portlet|portlet10.impl to o.a.p.container.om.portlet|
> portlet10.impl
> - move o.a.p.spi.impl to o.a.p.container.impl
> - move.o.a.p.impl.util to o.a.p.container.util
> and:
> - move all o.a.p.container.impl Default*Services (or similar like
> PortletContextManager) to o.a.p.container.driver.impl
> - move all o.a.p.container.impl Request/Response*ContextImpl to
> o.a.p.container.driver.impl.DefaultRequest/Response*Context
> (these really will be only light weight implementations and
> primarily for usage by Pluto Portal Driver)
>
+1 on the renaming as well
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
As indicated, I've started the package cleanup (PLUTO-537).
But... while doing this, the more it becomes clear this whole SPI package naming really isn't that appropriate.
While the SPI packaging indicates "pluggable" interfaces to be provided/implemented by the portal,
in practice a large part of the Pluto provided SPI implementation classes really are very core/generic/standard and are unlikely to be
(completely) replaced by an embedding portal.
And then, some other interfaces *are* expected to be provided, extended or replaced by the embedding portal.
Furthermore, some interfaces are more Object model like, while others clearly are services like.
I'm now planning to follow the suggestion Carsten already somewhat made in his initial proposal, and use a much more descriptive packaging
structure (based on the previously targeted packaging) which also better "aligns" with the jar "container" naming:
container-api:
- move o.a.p.* to o.a.p.container
- move o.a.p.driver.* to o.a.p.container.driver
- move.o.a.p.spi.* to o.a.p.container
- move.o.a.p.om.portlet.* to o.a.p.container.om.portlet
and:
- move all o.a.p.container *services* to o.a.p.container.services
container (impl):
- move o.a.p.impl.* to o.a.p.container.impl
- move o.a.p.driver.impl.* to o.a.p.container.driver.impl
- move o.a.p.om.portlet|portlet10.impl to o.a.p.container.om.portlet|portlet10.impl
- move o.a.p.spi.impl to o.a.p.container.impl
- move.o.a.p.impl.util to o.a.p.container.util
and:
- move all o.a.p.container.impl Default*Services (or similar like PortletContextManager) to o.a.p.container.driver.impl
- move all o.a.p.container.impl Request/Response*ContextImpl to o.a.p.container.driver.impl.DefaultRequest/Response*Context
(these really will be only light weight implementations and primarily for usage by Pluto Portal Driver)
Regards,
Ate
Ate Douma wrote:
> Thanks guys for the support.
> I'll start moving stuff around then and apply the new packaging proposal.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ate
>
> Woonsan Ko wrote:
>> +1 Woonsan
>>
>>
>> --- On Mon, 3/9/09, David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
>>> To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
>>> Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 5:47 PM
>>> +1 David
>>>
>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Randy Watler wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Randy
>>>>
>>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>>> Hi Ate,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think your proposal for the package changes
>>> makes sense; once we have
>>>>> changed this, we can have a look again and see how
>>> it "feels" in reality :)
>>>>> Carsten
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
Thanks guys for the support.
I'll start moving stuff around then and apply the new packaging proposal.
Regards,
Ate
Woonsan Ko wrote:
> +1 Woonsan
>
>
> --- On Mon, 3/9/09, David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com> wrote:
>
>> From: David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
>> To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
>> Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 5:47 PM
>> +1 David
>>
>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Randy Watler wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>> Hi Ate,
>>>>
>>>> I think your proposal for the package changes
>> makes sense; once we have
>>>> changed this, we can have a look again and see how
>> it "feels" in reality :)
>>>> Carsten
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
Posted by Woonsan Ko <wo...@yahoo.com>.
+1 Woonsan
--- On Mon, 3/9/09, David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com> wrote:
> From: David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
> To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
> Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 5:47 PM
> +1 David
>
> On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Randy Watler wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Randy
> >
> > Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >> Hi Ate,
> >>
> >> I think your proposal for the package changes
> makes sense; once we have
> >> changed this, we can have a look again and see how
> it "feels" in reality :)
> >>
> >> Carsten
> >>
> >>
> >
Re: [VOTE] Cleaning up our packages
Posted by David Sean Taylor <da...@bluesunrise.com>.
+1 David
On Mar 9, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Randy Watler wrote:
> +1
>
> Randy
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>
>> I think your proposal for the package changes makes sense; once we
>> have
>> changed this, we can have a look again and see how it "feels" in
>> reality :)
>>
>> Carsten
>>
>>
>