While working through ISPN-2463, and the sub-tasks I was wondering about the organisation of the ConfigurationBuilder classes. Currently, they are located in org.infinispan.configuration.cache.etc or org.infinispan.configuration.global.etc. The actual Configuration classes are within the same package already as well. To me, this sounds a little bit cluttered and perhaps not very intuitive and I was wondering if it might be a better idea to have something like: org.infinispan.configuration.cache.builders.ConfigurationBuilder (and others) org.infinispan.configuration.global.builders.GlobalConfigurationBuilder (etc etc) Another suggestion could be: org.infinispan.configuration.builders.cache.etc org.infinispan.configuration.builders.glocal.etc The only problem with that would be breaking backward compatibility, but from ISPN 6.x onwards I think that there are a fair few classes and packages being moved around anyway. It's just an idea that might make the API seem a little bit cleaner as to where it's located. Thoughts? ------------------------ Navin Surtani Software Engineer JBoss SET JBoss EAP Twitter: @navssurtani Blog: navssurtani.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

On 26 Jun 2013, at 09:54, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)infinispan.org&gt; wrote: > Please don't break the configuration API again :-( > > On 26 June 2013 06:29, Navin Surtani <nsurtani(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> While working through ISPN-2463, and the sub-tasks I was wondering about the >> organisation of the ConfigurationBuilder classes. >> >> Currently, they are located in org.infinispan.configuration.cache.etc or >> org.infinispan.configuration.global.etc. The actual Configuration classes >> are within the same package already as well. To me, this sounds a little bit >> cluttered and perhaps not very intuitive and I was wondering if it might be >> a better idea to have something like: >> >> org.infinispan.configuration.cache.builders.ConfigurationBuilder (and >> others) >> org.infinispan.configuration.global.builders.GlobalConfigurationBuilder (etc >> etc) >> >> Another suggestion could be: >> >> org.infinispan.configuration.builders.cache.etc >> org.infinispan.configuration.builders.glocal.etc >> >> The only problem with that would be breaking backward compatibility, but >> from ISPN 6.x onwards I think that there are a fair few classes and packages >> being moved around anyway. It's just an idea that might make the API seem a >> little bit cleaner as to where it's located. >> >> Thoughts? Indeed sounds is a good suggestion but as Sanne mentioned this would break the backward compatibility which is something we want to avoid. Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org) _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev