Well, as soon as it's compatible with the naming scheme the project selected (is the poll over btw ?), no objection.
Nio, not NIO... On 9/27/07, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It seems like there's no objection since the first posting. More than > a week have been passed, so I assume there are nobody concerned with > the proposed change. :D > > Trustin > > On 9/17/07, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi community, > > > > I've just added IoService interfaces that fits into any > > socket/datagram implementations: > > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/transport/socket/ > > > > These interfaces were introduced to provide more socket > > implementations (e.g. APR and blocking I/O) and to let user switch > > between the implementations more easily. I hope it makes sense. > > > > As you see, they have the same names with the implementation classes > > in org.apache.mina.transport.socket.nio. Because of possible > > confusion, I'd like to add 'NIO' prefix to all service implementations > > (e.g. SocketAcceptor -> NIOSocketAcceptor). What do you think? Do > > you have any better idea? > > > > Possible candidate actions Julien and I thought are (this is a poll): > > > > [ ] Add 'NIO' prefix > > [ ] Add 'Default' prefix, move them up to > > org.apache.mina.transport.socket and remove the nio and the bio > > (unlikely to be implemented?) package. > > [ ] Why did you introduce these interfaces!? Roll back! :( > > [ ] ________________ (write here) > > > > Cheers, > > Trustin > > > > PS: I will fire a vote about the consistent naming style in a separate > > thread, so please don't say 'Nio' is better. ;) > > -- > > what we call human nature is actually human habit > > -- > > http://gleamynode.net/ > > -- > > PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6 > > > > > -- > what we call human nature is actually human habit > -- > http://gleamynode.net/ > -- > PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6 > -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
