Hi Robert While NodeUtil and TreeUtil would naturally fit to plugins.tree, I am not convinced that ApproximateCounter really belongs there. Afaik it is only used for query index strategy and counting. I would rather move 'ApproximateCounter' to 'plugins.index'.
Regarding moving 'NodeUtil' and 'TreeUtil': IMHO we have here 2 utility classes providing almost the same functionality. I would prefer to decide on the redundancy (and potentially clean it up) before moving it to a package that already has semantic versioning enabled (in contrast to the util package where they currently are located). wdyt? Kind regards Angela On 14/04/17 12:47, "Robert Munteanu" <[email protected]> wrote: >I created a final PR for this as I have somewhat mixed feelings. One >one had, it finally nukes the util package. On the other hand, it looks >like a lot of noise for 3 classes. > > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co >m%2Fmreutegg%2Fjackrabbit-oak%2Fpull%2F6&data=02%7C01%7C%7C287ecd3d735246c >cbc8308d48323b62e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63627763678 >7796080&sdata=HSDWauCHB%2Bb4OaX90CfEWsA7487EP3FvrSicZNgKD8Q%3D&reserved=0 > >Robert > >On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 14:49 +0000, Angela Schreiber wrote: >> Hi Robert >> >> plugins.tree would feel natural to me. >> regarding the export: not sure about that either... the plugins.tree >> has >> some unfortunate dependencies e.g. to oak.core. so probably more work >> ahead in that area. >> >> kind regards >> angela >> >> On 06/04/17 16:41, "Robert Munteanu" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Working in the m12n branch [1] I'm trying to get rid of the >> > o.a.j.oak.util package and the last surviving members are >> > ApproximateCounter, NodeUtil and TreeUtil. >> > >> > As I see it these classes are essentially helpers built on top of >> > the >> > Tree and NodeState APIs. Those would make them candidates on for >> > either >> > oak-store-spi or (if we manage to trim down the dependencies) oak- >> > base. >> > >> > However I am having trouble naming the package which will hold >> > them. >> > They're not part of the spi, so I can't put them in spi.state . >> > >> > Maybe they belong in oak-core in plugins.tree, but I'm not sure if >> > we >> > want to keep that as a package which is exported outside oak-core. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > Robert >> > >> > [1]: >> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi >> > thub.co >> > m%2Fmreutegg%2Fjackrabbit- >> > oak%2Ftree%2Fm12n&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbfc1feb5ff4a >> > 4866c79c08d47cfafe6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6 >> > 3627086 >> > 4841267177&sdata=CWwq4ifTZIU1gW9UEd2STRLm%2B1svSP0kvlkLMksmWcM%3D&r >> > eserved >> > =0 >> >> >
