11 Oct
2012
11 Oct
'12
5:18 p.m.
Actually ScriptServiceis not a good example since there are not
supposed to have anything but calls to the actual component and
convert/adapt/protect the data for scripting but there is perfectly
valid use cases that are a pain to manage right now: invalidate some
internal cache of a component based on events. For theses you would
need to implement both the component main job and EventListener.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Oct 11, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
On 10/10/2012 06:21 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Then you should have a different component since ScriptService is… a script service and
thus not meant to be used from Java…
I personally like the fact that a component can implement only one role. Makes a clean
separation of concerns.
-Vincent
On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:00 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
It is if you want to use it not just from scripts, but from Java as well. I'm talking
mostly about utilities like XMLScriptService which don't expose an internal component
to scripts, but provide their own functionality. On 10/10/2012 12:03 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 04:30 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>> Hi Ludovic,
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Ludovic Dubost <ludovic(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why would script services be internal ? They should have a stable API
>>> shouldn't they ?
>> Yes, I agree, each Script Service should define an interface and
>> implement it in addition to implementing ScriptService.
>>
>> We've been lazy and we should fix this as otherwise CLIRR won't let us
>> know when we break scripting APIs.
>
> Wouln't it be good to start distinguish between API and SPI, and have a
> different set of CLIRR rules for each type ?
>
> For instance, I don't see a big benefit in not allowing new methods in
> such script services interfaces. In my opinion those are not designed or
> intended to be extended or implemented by third parties anyway.
> So IMO going through a VOTE everytime one adds a new method to a script
> service is too constraining for little value.
>
> My 2 cents
> Jerome
Totally agree.
Yes we can start brainstorming about it. It's a lot of work. We need to define
precisely what we call SPI and what we call API and then define rules for SPI package name
(probably needs "spi" in the package name or api needs to be put in an
"api" package name), need to think about migration from what we have to the
target, etc.
One other thing that bugs me is that a component that implements two roles will have two
instances, and this makes it harder to have a class that implements both ScriptService and
a specific role for that component.
Yes but that's not needed. The script service only needs to implement 1 component
role, the interface doesn't have to be a role. Thanks
-Vincent
>>>> Ludovic
>>>>
>>>> 2012/10/10 Marius Dumitru Florea <mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Ludovic Dubost
<ludovic(a)xwiki.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found an issue with the maven project to generate the javadocs
for
>>>>>> SRD. Apparently all the internal packages are ignored.
>>> This is normal and good. We don't want to show these to the user.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>>>>> This is no necessarly a problem unless we want them in the
javadocs.
>>>>>> Now there is a problem as some APIs are in internal, which does
not
>>>>>> seem normal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the case of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
org.xwiki.officeimporter.internal.script.OfficeImporterScriptService
>>>>>>
>>>>>
org.xwiki.officeimporter.internal.openoffice.script.OpenOfficeManagerScriptService
>>>>>
>>>>>>
org.xwiki.office.viewer.internal.DefaultOfficeViewerScriptService
>>>>> Most of our script services are internal. For the office module I
need
>>>>> to create a single script service (hint=office) with 3 methods
>>>>> getImporter(), getManager() and getViewer().
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Marius
>>>>>
>>>>>> Until we find a solution i've reverted to the javadocs
manually
>>>>>> generated (without the maven project).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ludovic
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs