| Re: RES: [dsdp-mtj-dev] new round of mtj api review |
|
Sorry... this email got lost in my inbox. My primary concern with *any* API changes at this time is that there is really no time to get feedback on those changes. The argument in favor of making the changes now is that it is easier than making them later. With that said, if we really do lock these things in as API, we will need to support them. What is your feeling at this point in terms of things that we are actually marking as API versus things that are provisional for 1.0? Craig Paula Gustavo-WGP010 wrote: hi craig, sorry for the late response. it is carnaval here in brazil :) the change that we want to do now is to create the isdk interface. we didn't have time to do that in the last round :(. besides that there are also changes that we identify, but i'm not sure if we sohuld do it or not. the idea is to remove imidpdevice and leave only the abstractmidpdevice class. the main motivation is that, if anyone is going to implement a midp device, he can just extend the abstractmidpdevice class and the interface is not necessary. but im not totaly convinced this is a good thing to do. do you think that this make sense? :) gep ________________________________ dp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx em nome de Craig Setera Enviada: qui 19/2/2009 21:32 Para: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list Assunto: Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] new round of mtj api review Looks pretty good. Do we really want to bite off the IDevice/ISDK interface refactoring? Is that already done? Those seem like API classes that we should get in early in the *next* release so that we can get some burn in and feedback. I have concerns with us putting a lot of API changes in this late in the cycle when there isn't time to validate that those changes are what we want. (with the exception of making things private until we have time to vet them) Paula Gustavo-WGP010 wrote: Hi MTJ, We did a new round of mtj api review and open a list with a several improvements. This list is available on mtj 1.0 plan http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=dsdp.mtj <http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=dsdp.mtj> under theme / priorities "MTJ API Documentation and Unit Tests". The focus was on the mtj.core plugin. Please feel free to comment on those bugs and / or add new bugs. We plan to address those improvements on the following builds :-) gep ________________________________ _______________________________________________ dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev |