On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:18 PM, John Vines <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think we should keep them around after a phase of deprecation. They > already made the object, let the user call a method on it to attach it > instead of a static class. > > But wouldn't it be better to have a method off scanner to fetch cfq instead > of the other way around?
I would not consider ColumnFQ part of the public API. So the scanner API should probably not reference it. > > Sent from my phone, so pardon the typos and brevity. > On Aug 7, 2012 3:06 PM, "Billie Rinaldi (JIRA)" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> [ >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-718?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13430535#comment-13430535] >> >> Billie Rinaldi commented on ACCUMULO-718: >> ----------------------------------------- >> >> This is done. Does anyone think we should keep the old static methods >> around? >> >> > make the static methods in ColumnFQ instance methods >> > ---------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > Key: ACCUMULO-718 >> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-718 >> > Project: Accumulo >> > Issue Type: Improvement >> > Components: client >> > Affects Versions: 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT >> > Reporter: Eric Newton >> > Assignee: Billie Rinaldi >> > Priority: Trivial >> > >> > Instead of >> > {noformat} >> > ColumnFQ.fetch(scanner, cfq); >> > {noformat} >> > we would write >> > {noformat} >> > cfq.fetch(scanner); >> > {noformat} >> >> -- >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA >> administrators: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa >> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira >> >> >>
