Yes, that's the snag. Unfortunately the CacheContainer in core is a
little too complex to be put in API.
I had the choice of using the names Cache and CacheContainer in -api and
introduce EmbeddedCache and EmbeddedCacheContainer in -core, but that
meant changing lots of code around that. So I opted for BasicCache and
BasicCacheContainer in -api, which I thought had less impact since the
embedded case is probably more common. One way or the other we would
cause disruption.
Tristan
On 11/07/2011 10:40 AM, Galder ZamarreƱo wrote:
Hi Tristan,
Shouldn't RemoteCacheManager be extending CacheContainer instead of
BasicCacheContainer?
Otherwise, existing client code like this will break:
https://issues.jboss.org/secure/attachment/12348761/ClientTest1.java
Cheers,
--
Galder ZamarreƱo
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache