On 15 Feb 2011, at 15:00, Pete Muir wrote:
Personally, I would leave the setters alone (except to add
@Deprecated :-) and add new fluent methods.
+1.
I also think we should get rid of these methods in 6.
On 15 Feb 2011, at 14:49, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I need to make some decisions, complete this feature and take
> configuration fluent API stuff off my plate. Pete made a good point [1]
> about method names in fluent API, however, there is a cost involved in
> terms of method duplication in all our configuration beans.
>
> As is, I changed return types for configuration bean setters from void
> to a specific type. This will cause binary incompatibility for people
> using configuration beans directly in their 5.0 deployments. I think
> most people use Configuration and GlobalConfiguration so most will be
> immune but some will need to recompile their codebase with Alpha3.
>
> If we go for duplication then we are avoid this problem. What do we want
> to do?
>
>
> Let me know,
> Vladimir
>
> [1]
https://community.jboss.org/thread/162543?tstart=0
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev