Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Costin Manolache
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > Costin Manolache wrote: > > >On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> On 27/09/2012 10:09, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > >> > I am sure that DirContext is not the right API to define resources. > >> > > >> > At best is

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Costin Manolache
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Remy Maucherat wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 07:34 -0700, Costin Manolache wrote: > > One use for a resource API is if it provides different backends - like > > Hadoop filesystem abstraction > > does. Than you could serve from hdfs/db/etc, and someone could use

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Remy Maucherat
On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 07:34 -0700, Costin Manolache wrote: > One use for a resource API is if it provides different backends - like > Hadoop filesystem abstraction > does. Than you could serve from hdfs/db/etc, and someone could use the same > api in deploy tools > or general programs. > One of th

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Mark Thomas
Costin Manolache wrote: >On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 27/09/2012 10:09, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> > I am sure that DirContext is not the right API to define resources. >> > >> > At best is could be a [deprecated] view/proxy to the actual >> implementation. >>

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Costin Manolache
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 27/09/2012 10:09, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > > I am sure that DirContext is not the right API to define resources. > > > > At best is could be a [deprecated] view/proxy to the actual > implementation. > > > > The only benefit I see in usin

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Mark Thomas
On 27/09/2012 10:09, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > I am sure that DirContext is not the right API to define resources. > > At best is could be a [deprecated] view/proxy to the actual implementation. > > The only benefit I see in using this API by someone is that the API > itself is defined in javax

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-27 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2012/9/27 Mark Thomas : > On 19/09/2012 20:46, Mark Thomas wrote: >> On 09/09/2012 19:50, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> This is part of issue b) in Konstantin's comments in TOMCAT-NEXT.txt >>> >>> Konstantin has accurately summed up the issues with basing the API on >>> DirContext as: >>> - Unnecessa

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-26 Thread Mark Thomas
On 19/09/2012 20:46, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 09/09/2012 19:50, Mark Thomas wrote: >> This is part of issue b) in Konstantin's comments in TOMCAT-NEXT.txt >> >> Konstantin has accurately summed up the issues with basing the API on >> DirContext as: >> - Unnecessary objects, e.g. NamingException

Re: Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-19 Thread Mark Thomas
On 09/09/2012 19:50, Mark Thomas wrote: > This is part of issue b) in Konstantin's comments in TOMCAT-NEXT.txt > > Konstantin has accurately summed up the issues with basing the API on > DirContext as: > - Unnecessary objects, e.g. NamingException instead of null. > > - Too many methods

Resources - Is DirContext the right basis for the API?

2012-09-09 Thread Mark Thomas
This is part of issue b) in Konstantin's comments in TOMCAT-NEXT.txt Konstantin has accurately summed up the issues with basing the API on DirContext as: - Unnecessary objects, e.g. NamingException instead of null. - Too many methods. Name vs. String. list() vs. listBindings(). -