-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Separate Projects #34
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Labels
Area: MappingRelates to one of the `ITopicMappingService` interfaces or implementations.Relates to one of the `ITopicMappingService` interfaces or implementations.Area: PackagesRelates to packaging the library as a NuGet package.Relates to packaging the library as a NuGet package.Status 0: DiscussionNeeds further evaluation of requirements and prioritization.Needs further evaluation of requirements and prioritization.Type: ImprovementImproves the functionality or interface of an existing feature.Improves the functionality or interface of an existing feature.
Description
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
Area: MappingRelates to one of the `ITopicMappingService` interfaces or implementations.Relates to one of the `ITopicMappingService` interfaces or implementations.Area: PackagesRelates to packaging the library as a NuGet package.Relates to packaging the library as a NuGet package.Status 0: DiscussionNeeds further evaluation of requirements and prioritization.Needs further evaluation of requirements and prioritization.Type: ImprovementImproves the functionality or interface of an existing feature.Improves the functionality or interface of an existing feature.
Currently, a number of implementations which aren’t required by the core
OnTopiclibrary are included in theOnTopicproject. We should consider migrating these to separate projects (and, thus, packages) within the same repository, similar to e.g.,SqlTopicRepository.Obviously, the interfaces, base classes, and any shared classes would remain in the
OnTopicproject.Candidates
(Cached)TopicMappingService(Cached)HierarchicalTopicMappingServiceReverseTopicMappingServicePositively, this would better separate ancillary libraries. Negatively, it would increase the number of packages, even though most would be needed by typical projects, and it’s unlikely that we’d end up with alternate implementations that might need to be swapped out.