> My idea is to be able using low level things outside of nutch also. > It is may a philosophically question in case of the map file writer > you pass a complete hashmap with a bunch of properties to the object, > but the objects only reads one int from this hashmap. I personal > don't like to use a hashmap to 'transport' just one value.
Yes Stefan, but passing only the NutchConf in the constructor 1. avoid breaking compatibility if a new parameter is used in a future version of the constructor. 2. Give control of default values to the class itself instead of the calling object. I think that we can accept the general convention that all NutchConfigurable objects must provide a constructor with a single NutchConf parameter. Excuse me in advance, I probably missed something, but what are the use cases for having many NutchConf instances with different values? Regards Jérôme
