On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 02/13/2015 03:00 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote: > > > >> This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads now, and there > seems > >> to be at least tacit agreement that the plural doesn't make sense > anymore > >> now that we've seen how integrations/extensions will work. > >> > >> I'll be posting an alpha later today, but before that I'd like to do the > >> reactors->reactor rename of the python package to keep everything > >> consistent. This stuff hasn't been in a release yet, so I don't think > >> there > >> are any backwards compatibility issues, but if this will cause problems, > >> please follow up and I will create an alias. > >> > > > > Just a suggestion, but what about proton.reactive? Perhaps proton. > > handlers could then be proton.reactive.handlers, which would make the > > relationship clearer. > > > > I'm fairly neutral on proton.reactive vs proton.reactor. I do kind of like > the notion of a "proton.reactor", mostly because it sounds like something > awesome that is used to power starships, however that isn't a huge deal. > > I'm less of a fan of nesting handlers, partly just because it's longer, and > partly because it complicates the mapping to the C API which like most C > APIs is just flatter. > > Another option favoring conciseness and consistency with C might be to get > rid of the "reactor" portion entirely: > > - proton.Reactor, proton.Container, and proton.handlers.* > > All in all I'm not super fussed, I could probably live with any of the > options. I did already do the reactors->reactor rename, but it's easy > enough to do it again if any of the above seem significantly preferable. > > --Rafael > One more concern: there's a division in the current api layout that I'm uncomfortable with, between proton.event and proton.reactor. Is that a division we want? If it's not, I'd like to collapse them, perhaps into proton.event? Separately, I see some advantage in moving Reactor and Container into proton core since I expect them to find frequent use. I just don't want to drag in all the related infrastructure.
