Reading over the comments, we all appear to be agreeing on Gregg's
approach, in that case I'll clean up LookupLocator before release, then
we can look at how we can implement a configurable deployment mechanism.
Regards,
Peter.
On 14/11/2012 8:28 PM, Dan Creswell wrote:
...
On 14 November 2012 10:20, Simon IJskes - QCG<[email protected]> wrote:
On 14-11-12 10:49, Dan Creswell wrote:
Which implies a socket factory isn't required because there's only one way
to "do" unicast and it's all taken care of under the covers.
A socketfactory is also the place to post process Sockets [1]. So if you
want to keep Socket, there is no reason to do away with SocketFactory.
Sorry, can't quite grok that last sentence. I agree re: post-processing
being something one might do with a SocketFactory albeit there are things
that would be acceptable to tweak and things that wouldn't as dictated by
the URL.
My point being that IMHO this isn't the best arrangement for doing little
bits of customisation as it leaves plenty of potential for trapdoors.
Better to clean it up and build something explicit to do what we're after,
hence my support of Gregg's statements.
[1] javax.net.SocketFactory javadoc:
"So for example, factories could be customized to return sockets with
different networking timeouts or security parameters already configured."
--
QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
