> > On May 2, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Chris Pike <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't think we are just swapping grievances. The code has potentially fatal > runtime errors with the static config blocks. > > Let me ask this, can we assume that clients should always use the factories > to communicate with the API? If yes, we could have all code call > Config.getInstance() and have the factories make sure the remote config > loaded before continuing.
Yes that would be fine.
