On 08/13/2013 04:50 PM, Mircea Markus wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2013, at 15:30, Galder ZamarreƱo <galder(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Mircea Markus <mmarkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 07:59, Galder ZamarreƱo <galder(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My preference is for #1.
>>>>
>>>> The main reason is cos JSR-107 is about to hit mainstream and we should
try to align with it in a way that we reduce confusion. Remember that JSR-107 users are
potential Infinispan users, and viceversa, so keeping these interfaces separated would
make the mental effort required to bridge the knowledge between the two easier.
>>>>
>>>> I tried to go back in the JSR-107 discussions to find discussions (google
group) on this topic but couldn't find anything. Maybe Manik remembers something about
it, but seems like this topic has been pretty much set in stone for quite a while.
>>>>
>>>> In terms of configuration, there's no issue at all. Each cache store
provides its own schema now.
>>>
>>> good point. Not the custom ones though, these still need a custom tag.
>> ^ No, we don't, or if we currently do, we shouldn't stop doing so.
> Nooo... writing a custom parser for a custom cache store is quite a bit of work and
requires understanding of ISPN configuration hierarchy. People would hate us! E.g. the
jdbc one:
http://goo.gl/VQiQ3u
I've written such parser on Friday, basically just copying and rewriting
the SingleFileCacheStore stuff (adding my own properties instead). It
took me about an hour and I don't hate anyone from infinispan team :)
Maybe I am already advanced ISPN user, but I don't consider it as a
complicated task as long as there is some template (simple cache-store
implementation) I can use for reference.
Doesn't sounds as hard as I imagined, I'll write the sample mvn module then to see
how it goes. Thanks for the feedback.
Cheers,
--
Mircea Markus
Infinispan lead (