What they should be doing is probably far from what they actually are doing. Is this expectation actually written anywhere? Otherwise, how are consumers supposed to know? Lets not punish people for trying to use our product.
Regards, Ryan Goulding On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Robert Varga <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/10/2016 06:44 PM, Colin Dixon wrote: > > I think flow:1 is hard code a lot of places even inside OpenDaylight... > > That is a *really* bad idea. This is equivalent of assuming a particular > implementation of an interface. > > Whoever is using this hard-coded value should be getting a reference to > a topology instead (and check whether the injected topology conforms to > expectations by advertising a topology-type). > > Bye, > Robert > > > _______________________________________________ > release mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/release > >
_______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
