Hi guys, when the functional API has been outline, the interfaces were put into infinispan-commons to make it possible to share these between remote clients and embedded use case. However, it seems that reusing this as-is impossible or at least impractical as we cannot send the lambdas in a language neutral way. In the future, we may implement a way to share functions between client and a server but that will most likely result in an interface accepting something else than Function<ReadWriteEntry, R>. Also, it's rather weird to have two EntryVersion interfaces.
Therefore I suggest moving org.infinispan.commons.api.functional to infinispan-core, package org.infinispan.api.functional You might say that the server-side code would use the interfaces, but once it's running on server, it should depend on core (or core-api) - commons is what is shared with the client, and if the client will in future register a new function on the server, the user code should depend on core-api as well (client-hotrod itself does not have to). If you wonder what led me to this is that I've tried to add SerializableFunction overloads to the FunctionalMap and found out that SerializableFunction et all are only in infinispan-core (for good). Please let me know if you have objections/if there something I have missed. Radim -- Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> JBoss Performance Team _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
