Hi Arun,
On 12/12/12 11:59 AM, Arun Gupta wrote:
> Danny,
>
> In Java EE 6, javax.servlet.annotation and javax.xml.bind.annotation
> are the only two packaged that have annotations separated out. All
> other technologies (JAX-RS, CDI, EJB, JAX-WS, etc) have them in the
> same packages. It makes sense to flatten out
> javax.websocket.annotations to javax.websocket package.
Yes we put took out the annotation subpackage in did that in an earlier
draft for that reason.
>
> As Mark mentioned, splitting the APIs in two packages does create
> cyclic dependency. OTOH, do you expect only APIs in the client package
> to be bundled for rich client applications ?
Rich client applications will need the javax.websocket.* package, server
applications will need javax.websocket.* and javax.websocket.server.*.
> IMHO the names are intuitive and its only 5 classes. I'd rather keep a
> flat structure with everything in javax.websocket.* package.
OK. Well we are balancing the need not to require server API classes for
rich clients, which really pulls us in the direction of needing a
separate package to make the separation between the models clean.
We may well have more server specific classes in future releases too !
- Danny
>
> Thanks,
> Arun
>
> On 12/12/12 3:49 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 12/12/2012 00:33, Danny Coward wrote:
>>
>> <snip/>
>>
>>> This is what the API would look like in this (final?) package
>>> structure:-
>>>
>>> javax.websocket.server.*
>>> - DefaultServerEndpointConfiguration
>>> - ServerEndpointConfiguration
>>> - ServerContainer
>>> - WebSocketEndpoint
>>> - WebSocketPathParam
>>>
>>> javax.websocket.*
>>> -<everything else>
>>>
>>> Let me know if anyone sees any issues with this arrangement.
>> One very minor nit is that it creates a circular dependency between the
>> two packages. It could be broken by having separate ContainerProviders
>> for client and server. I'm on the fence as to whether this is worth
>> doing.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>
--
<http://www.oracle.com> *Danny Coward *
Java EE
Oracle Corporation