On 15 April 2014 11:37, Göran Krampe <goran at krampe.se> wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 10:36 AM, Frank Shearar wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, "implementation detail" is... well, no, its a fair bit more than
>>> that
>>> I would say. Most web services just offer an API and keep the domain
>>> model
>>> on the server. SM doesn't - it offers a very simple API to actually
>>> download
>>> the whole model and then perform all readonly work on the client.
>>
>>
>> Ah, but that assumes that the downloaded model is isomorphic to the
>> internal model. That's not necessarily the case.
>
>
> Can you elaborate? I don't understand.

The internal model might have extra data. For instance, it could store
how many times someone's downloaded the package metadata or something.
You might not want to push all these extra bits to the client.

>>> And right, documentation is probably scarce, sorry about that, but you
>>> don't
>>> have to be snotty about it. And I think many of the classes have class
>>> comments and the code is probably fairly well commented too (granted it
>>> was
>>> a long time ago so I don't really remember).
>>
>>
>> My apologies: I didn't mean to sound snotty. Frustrated, yes, but not
>> snotty. (The frustration came from having to understand an entire HTTP
>> framework before I could start doing what I actually wanted to do.)
>> Good quality documentation is very expensive to produce.
>
>
> I should have picked a better word ;)
>
> What was it you actually wanted to do, and why did you need to understand
> the whole web framework? Just curious.
>
> ...and did you email me and ask? Perhaps you did, but I don't recall it.

No, I didn't :) I asked on the list a bit, pored over the code a lot
(from a copy of the production image).

frank

> regards, Göran