Hi Felix, You are right on both points. I will do as you suggest.
Thanks for your input. Best Regards Nico my blog! http://www.deviant-abstraction.net !! On 5/31/06, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Nicolas, I agree to include these methods on the repository layer. But thinking about the extent - rather than the intrincacies of handling concurrent modifications while backing up - I would have some remarks: (1) I would modify the signature to take InputStream and OutputStream objects, resp. This provides for more flexibility in terms of source and destination of the backup data. (2) Initially you mentioned a configuration file for the backup/restore procedures. I suggest you define configuration classes (interfaces), which can load/store themselves to and from streams (yes, I do not like being locked into File instances :-) and to add instances of the toplevel configuration (e.g. BackupConfiguration) as a parameter to the backup/restore methods. These two changes would greatly improve the flexibility using the API from within an application as opposed to from the command line. Also testing would be greatly simplified, I suppose. Regards Felix
