Yeah, eventually those were the names that made most sense to me. FYI, the pull req for this is up now: https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/245
I'm now working on updating http://community.jboss.org/docs/DOC-16198 On Apr 12, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Mircea Markus wrote: > On 12 Apr 2011, at 10:51, Dan Berindei wrote: > >> +1 for Externalizer/AdvancedExternalizer. > +1, we already do that for Cache/AdvancedCache. >> >> Dan >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Galder Zamarreño <gal...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 11, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: >>> >>>> Guys, any thoughts on this? I want this in for BETA2... >>>> >>>> On Apr 1, 2011, at 5:54 PM, Galder Zamarreño wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Re: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-986 >>>>> >>>>> As indicated in my comments, there's two room for two types of >>>>> serialization mechanisms: one for end users and the other for SPIs. >>>>> >>>>> I've got a solution for this in >>>>> https://github.com/galderz/infinispan/commit/09096f7998c0d0a5aae76d55bf59c72fe1cb510e >>>>> and wanted to give a heads up to everyone on what it involves: >>>>> >>>>> - Two separate externalizer interfaces: Externalizer (which currently, to >>>>> disrupt as little code as possible, is named EndUserExternalier) and >>>>> ExternalizerSpi or ServiceProviderExternalizer (currently named >>>>> Externalizer). The first API is basic read/write methods and the second >>>>> one with a couple of more methods for more specialised behaivour. Do >>>>> people like these names? Or can someone come up with better names? More >>>>> detailed info on the use cases in the JIRA. >>>> >>>> I'm currently leaning towards: Externalizer (only readObject/writeObject >>>> methods) and ExternalizerSpi (would contain the current >>>> https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/blob/master/core/src/main/java/org/infinispan/marshall/Externalizer.java) >>> >>> Actually, I don't like ExternalizerSpi name, it makes configuration getters >>> ackward: getExternalizerSpis... >>> >>> Instead I'm leaning for: Externalizer and AdvancedExternalizer which maps >>> very nicely with Cache and AdvancedCache and makes getters more readable: >>> getAdvancedExternalizers.... much clearer :) >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> - A related factor here would be to find a better name for the >>>>> XML/programmatic configuration, i.e. getServiceProviderExternalizers()? >>>>> <serviceProviderExternalzer> or getExternalizeSpis() <externalizerSpi>? >>>>> This is one thing and the other is that I'd want this XML and >>>>> programmatic configuration to be a bit hidden away cos it's specialised >>>>> or for edge cases. The obvious route the average Infinispan user should >>>>> be annotation and implement Infinispan's Externalizer interface. However, >>>>> I'm don't think there's anything special that can be done in the current >>>>> architechture of Infinispan without rethinking end user and spi >>>>> configuration. >>>> >>>> Since the XML is only relevant for the SPI version, the programmatic API >>>> would go along the lines of getExternalizerSpis() and <externalizerSpi> - >>>> Naming methods like this gives a direct link to the interface name while >>>> not being too verbose >>>> >>>>> >>>>> - To hide JBoss Marshaller details away and to simplify some of the API >>>>> it provides, I've created a new @MarshallableBy annotation that maps >>>>> directly to what JBMAR's @Externalizer does. To get an idea of the >>>>> differences for the end users, see >>>>> https://github.com/galderz/infinispan/commit/09096f7998c0d0a5aae76d55bf59c72fe1cb510e#diff-10 >>>>> as opposed to >>>>> https://github.com/galderz/infinispan/commit/09096f7998c0d0a5aae76d55bf59c72fe1cb510e#diff-9. >>>>> Are people happy with the annotation name? The cool thing is that if >>>>> someone wants to really use JBoss Marshaller Externalizers, they can, but >>>>> I think the majority will be happy with just a read/write object method. >>>>> >>>>> And that's about it! Afterwards it just needs proper documentation in >>>>> wiki and javadocs, but right now I'm mostly focused at getting naming >>>>> right. Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Ideally I'd like to get this into BETA1 (release date next Tuesday, 5th >>>>> April), but I'll prob hold till BETA2 to get the naming right. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> -- >>>>> Galder Zamarreño >>>>> Sr. Software Engineer >>>>> Infinispan, JBoss Cache >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>>> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Galder Zamarreño >>>> Sr. Software Engineer >>>> Infinispan, JBoss Cache >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>> >>> -- >>> Galder Zamarreño >>> Sr. Software Engineer >>> Infinispan, JBoss Cache >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Galder Zamarreño Sr. Software Engineer Infinispan, JBoss Cache _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
