Thanks Kelven,
you are right the error was mine. You don't have circular dependencies.
Thank you,
Alex
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alex Oscherov [mailto:alex.osche...@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2012 10:49 PM
> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Circular dependencies
> >
> > Hi Folks,
> > I have a question - I was just familiarizing myself with cloudstack
> > source
> > code and noticed that this code has pretty tight circular dependencies
> > between core, server and vmware-base modules (that's what I saw so far).
> > So
> > my question is - is it done intentionally - ir yest then what is the
> > intent
> > or it was done unintentionally but this is non-issue or you consider this
> > an issue that needs fixing? If you consider that an issue that needs
> > fixing
> > then let me know what my actions should be - should I file the bug,
> > should
> > I fix it on my own or do something else?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
>
> I don't think vmware-base has any inter-reference to any other CloudStack
> projects except the utility library. It is by-design to be generic(with no
> CloudStack assumption) and it is running both under management server
> context and SSVM context.
>
> The dependency between core and server are not circular as well, server
> depends on core but not the other way around. We may have some legacy
> code(i.e, unit test code) that residents at core but have reference back to
> server, if you find there still exists such code, please point it in the
> forum or file a bug to remove it.
>
> Circular-reference and tight-coupling are two different things, there are
> a lot of discussions going on internally on how to make CloudStack be more
> modularized and loose-coupled. I'm sure that we will see more posts on this
> subject soon.
>
> Kelven
>
>
>
>
