+100500 for dropping it. Having null names is the worst idea I can imagine.
People will have configuration incompatibilities anyways, disallowing nulls is not a big deal here. Sergi 2016-06-02 3:50 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > Warning is OK, but removing null name after having it for almost 2 years is > a bad idea. People are using it and will be forced to change their code for > no good reason. > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > We can add an explicit warning in 1.x when a cache with the null name is > > used and remove it in 2.0. > > > > 2016-06-01 15:49 GMT-07:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > > > -1 > > > > > > I don’t think this will give us any advantage other than many > frustrated > > > users who will need to change their code. We should definitely > discourage > > > using nulls though. > > > > > > D. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > I would also restrict nulls for node names, for IGFS names, etc.. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov < > > > akuznet...@gridgain.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, All! > > > > > > > > > > In ignite-1.x cache.name could be null. > > > > > > > > > > And we have to write a lot of code to handle such name, especially > in > > > > tools > > > > > like web console and Visor. > > > > > > > > > > In ignite 2.0 we could change API and make cache.name not null. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think about such change? > > > > > > > > > > It is worth to create such issue in JIRA? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alexey Kuznetsov > > > > > GridGain Systems > > > > > www.gridgain.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
