Hi Zuyu,
I am not sure how this hierarchy will solve the StorageManager issue we
were discussing. Can you please explain?
On a slightly unrelated and less important note, I feel the suffix
"lite" for base classes may not be the best choice. I know that protobuf
uses this suffix but their context is different (e.g. MessageLite stands
for light weight messages).
On 06/23/2016 03:49 PM, Zuyu Zhang wrote:
Hi Harshad,
After a second though, I have the following proposal:
We add a new base class called QueryManagerLite, from which the
current QueryManager and the future QueryManagerDistributed would
derive. Thus, we could keep the current QueryManager intact, including
holding QueryContext.
With that being said, in the distributed version, we could reuse
PolicyEnforcer, but both ForemanDistributed and
QueryManagerDistributed are unique implementations.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Zuyu
--
Thanks,
Harshad
