Yes, makes sense to me. Using package hierarchy definitely seems like the way to document/enforce/promote the modularization strategy.
I can't comment on Maven's impact on this, but it seems to me like the modularization is orthogonal to the use of Maven. Maven probably makes it easier to build, but isn't the key point to define the structure? Paul Austin wrote: > Martin, > > Eventually I will see the need for further separation as we add > different reusable libraries under the openjump banner such as the > DataObject framework. By using maven with its dependency management we > can slowly add further modularization as it makes sense. There will also > ben reusable UI components that do not depend on The JUMP workbench itself. > > A good way to start will be in how we use the package hierarchy in > org.open jump, if we define good separation there it'll make it easier > to move to modules if required. > > Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Jump-pilot-devel mailing list > Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel > > -- Martin Davis Senior Technical Architect Refractions Research, Inc. (250) 383-3022 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
