Re: [Figleaf-developer] Code refactoring

[Greg S. <ste...@on...>]

sam...@ma... wrote:

>OK, I've merged in my code - it now sits upnder the same net/sourceforge/figleaf
>package. The only thing of the original code that I've backed out is that
>Informative no longer implements Validatable, this is purely to reduce the
>amount of changes in my current code. The issues we still have to resolve
>however including:
>
>1. Does my InformativeFactory have to return proxies that implement both
>Informative and still have the original objects interface? I can't see how this
>is of benift to the UI
>  
>
 From the other e-mail it looks like we agree on the need for Proxies.

>2. If the user decides to implement Observalbe themselves, I pretty much ignore
>it - I need to treat this in the same way as the user defining their own
>ClassDescriptor implementations
>  
>
Yep.

>3. I've noticed that you've defined Hibernate persistence information for the
>Informative interface, but I'm not sure this is needed. If we provide the
>implementation then its autogenerated each time the application is run, if the
>user defines it any persistence of their own classes has to be up to them.
>  
>
I made a hibernate mapping file for InformativeDescriptorImpl, but not 
for Informative as far as I remember.

>4. Do we need to include the license description at the top of each file? Some
>files do, others don't - we probably need to decide on a consistent approach.
>  
>
My intent for now was to put it in every file, but I don't really know 
what is sufficient. Maybe just the copyright line?

>I've added @version $Id$ tags to all code I've touched - this is handy when
>tracking through code (CVS expands this to display version information on checkin).
>  
>
Good idea. I'll start doing it too.

>I'm now going to look over what I've done and tidy things up a little, and will
>then look either at beefing up our tests (I might add some tests for your code
>if that's OK?), the ant build script, or on some simple approaches for tying the
>layers together (so perhaps Pico, but probably Spring).
>
>  
>
It's OK with me if you add tests for my code.

I had a look at the maven generated ant build file and for some reason 
it was hard-coding paths in from my system. I couldn't find any 
properties or anything to alter that behavior...so that's nowhere for 
now. I have been adding lots of jars to the lib directory, and refining 
the Maven file.

Greg