Hi Oleg,
Looks good to me, thanks.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Oleg Kalnichevski [mailto:ol...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 4:19 PM
To: HttpComponents Project
Cc: Moore, Jonathan
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
I checked the patch in with some
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:03 AM
> To: HttpComponents Project
> Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
>
> Ok, I've attached a much simpler patch that only uses the callback in a
> non-surprising way.
>
> Jon
>
> -Orig
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 10:38 -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote:
> Sorry, I'm not clear on whether you still want me to open a JIRA issue
> about this or not, given that my patch seems to have gotten through. I'm
> happy to do it, though.
>
> Jon
>
I think it is no longer needed.
Oleg
--
0:20 AM
To: HttpComponents Project
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 10:03 -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote:
> Ok, I've attached a much simpler patch that only uses the callback in
a
> non-surprising way.
>
> Jon
>
Jon
I guess the patch
al Message-
From: Moore, Jonathan [mailto:jonathan_mo...@comcast.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:21 AM
To: HttpComponents Project
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
Ok, can someone else let me know if my patches are showing up? They're
getting stripped from my mes
ssage-
> From: Moore, Jonathan [mailto:jonathan_mo...@comcast.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:16 AM
> To: HttpComponents Project
> Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
>
> Reattaching my patch as a .txt file -- the copy of my message I got back
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 10:20 -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote:
> Ok, can someone else let me know if my patches are showing up? They're
> getting stripped from my messages somewhere along the line, and I don't
> know whether it's before they hit the list or if my inbound mail server
> is stripping them
ok).
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Moore, Jonathan [mailto:jonathan_mo...@comcast.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:16 AM
To: HttpComponents Project
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
Reattaching my patch as a .txt file -- the copy of my message I got back
had t
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 10:03 -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote:
> Ok, I've attached a much simpler patch that only uses the callback in a
> non-surprising way.
>
> Jon
>
Jon
I guess the patch got stripped. Could you please raise new JIRA issue
and attach the patch to it?
Oleg
Ok, *this* time I've remembered to actually attach the patch. Sigh. :)
-Original Message-
From: Moore, Jonathan
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:16 AM
To: 'HttpComponents Project'
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
Reattaching my patch as a .txt f
nents Project
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review (take 2)
Ok, I've attached a much simpler patch that only uses the callback in a
non-surprising way.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Moore, Jonathan [mailto:jonathan_mo...@comcast.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Ok, I've attached a much simpler patch that only uses the callback in a
non-surprising way.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Moore, Jonathan [mailto:jonathan_mo...@comcast.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 9:32 AM
To: HttpComponents Project
Subject: RE: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API r
I agree that the lack of explicit locking is good; however, I wonder if
the interface is now offering something that implementations can't
always provide, because not all backing stores will be able to offer
this level of transaction.
The primary example would be several JVMs in a pool of app serv
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 15:04 -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote:
> Hi Oleg, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here.
>
This change was not driven by any practical requirement. I was just
going through the code and the existing behavior of the
#updateCacheEntry method took me completely by sur
mentation to drive the API changes.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Richie Jefts [mailto:rje...@rfcode.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 12:37 PM
To: dev@hc.apache.org
Subject: Re: [HttpCache][PATCH] Caching API review
I dislike getLock(). It exposes implementation details. Why not keep
I dislike getLock(). It exposes implementation details. Why not keep the
old style of code and make it more explicit it may modify multiple
entries. Something like.
BasicHttpCache.update(String url, HttpCacheUpdate update);
It ensures callers don't have to mess with the lock since it all happe
16 matches
Mail list logo
