daniellavoie commented on pull request #5608: URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-pinot/pull/5608#issuecomment-649762218
> what's the reasoning behind PinotConfiguration not extending Configuration class? This is quite a big bang and I am certainly open to re-evaluate the overall approach. My motivation to wrap ` Configuration` and not extend it is to purposely decouple the code base from Configuration. Commons Configuration is getting old and an upgrade to 2.x is a breaking change where the package of `Configuration` is not the same. Wrapping Configuration in PinotConfiguration and not expose it is mainly justified by the fact that is will reduce the impact of a potential migration to 2.x (or even bring support to other configuration framework if needed). I'll document the Javadoc extensively once I reach on consensus on the overall approach :) ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
