[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

[genman]

Since I spent some time refactoring these classes, I have a few comments.

Actually, it's pretty close to what I'd like to see. "UnversionedNode" seems a little long for a name. And usually, you use naming to describe what something is, not what it isn't.

I still don't know how Node will proxy calls to Cache. Currently, NodeImpl is tied directly to TreeCache. How are these two classes going to interact?

Also, I'd like to hear some feedback on this issue: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBCACHE-890 . I think we may want to add a couple of flags (three already come to mind.) Multiple booleans might be sufficient for the moment. Still, having a way to extend things cleanly might be nice in 2.0.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3994334#3994334

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3994334