You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@directory.apache.org by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com> on 2015/06/01 17:14:22 UTC

Fortress-Core modularization was Re: [Bulk] Re: [Fortress] Sonar...

I rename this thread for clarity.


I would also suggest another approach here. We *could* also split
fortress-core in modules (à la Maven) :
- an API module that contains the interfaces
- a model module
- a ldap module
- a rest module
etc

wdyt ?

Re: Fortress-Core modularization was Re: [Bulk] Re: [Fortress] Sonar...

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 01/06/15 17:37, Shawn McKinney a écrit :
>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I would also suggest another approach here. We *could* also split
>> fortress-core in modules (à la Maven) :
>> - an API module that contains the interfaces
>> - a model module
>> - a ldap module
>> - a rest module
>> etc
>>
>> wdyt ?
> Would this require multiple jar files for the core?  

Yes, but they could be bundled into one jar, like what we did with the API.

> Right now I am not be in favor of that.

ATM, not sure that would be necessary, considering the size of
fortress-core.

I'm more in favor in refactoring the existing packages to reflect the
layers we have.

Re: Fortress-Core modularization was Re: [Bulk] Re: [Fortress] Sonar...

Posted by Shawn McKinney <sm...@apache.org>.

> On Jun 1, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I would also suggest another approach here. We *could* also split
> fortress-core in modules (à la Maven) :
> - an API module that contains the interfaces
> - a model module
> - a ldap module
> - a rest module
> etc
> 
> wdyt ?

Would this require multiple jar files for the core?  Right now I am not be in favor of that.

Shawn
smckinney@apache.org