Skip to content

Refactor: Public API for Safe Customization

Concept Position

flowchart TD
  family["Python Programming"] --> program["Python Object-Oriented Programming"]
  program --> module["Module 09: Public APIs, Extension Seams, and Governance"]
  module --> concept["Refactor: Public API for Safe Customization"]
  concept --> capstone["Capstone pressure point"]
flowchart TD
  problem["Start with the design or failure question"] --> example["Study the worked example and trade-offs"]
  example --> boundary["Name the boundary this page is trying to protect"]
  boundary --> proof["Carry that question into code review or the capstone"]

Read the first diagram as a placement map: this page is one concept inside its parent module, not a detached essay, and the capstone is the pressure test for whether the idea holds. Read the second diagram as the working rhythm for the page: name the problem, study the example, identify the boundary, then carry one review question forward.

Goal

Expose the monitoring capstone through a clean public surface with documented extension points, compatibility policy, and reviewable customization rules.

Refactor Outline

  1. Define a facade for supported commands, public types, and extension capabilities.
  2. Separate internal modules from the public entry surface.
  3. Add a protocol or interface for one supported customization point.
  4. Document deprecation and compatibility expectations for that surface.
  5. Add executable examples and compatibility checks around the supported path.

What to Watch For

  • Consumers should not need deep imports into internal capstone modules.
  • Extension points should not mutate aggregate internals directly.
  • Docs and examples should demonstrate the supported public path.
  • Review notes should explain why each exported surface is public.

Suggested Verification

  • run an example using only the new facade surface
  • fail a compatibility test by changing an exported behavior
  • register a custom implementation through the supported extension point
  • review imports to confirm internal modules are no longer the expected public path

Review Questions

  1. Which surfaces are now explicitly public, and why?
  2. What customization is supported without private-state access?
  3. How would a deprecation on the facade be communicated and verified?
  4. Which tests prove that examples and compatibility promises stay current?