[jclouds-site-pull-requests
#393](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-site-pull-requests/393/)
SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54453827
to review your changes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54454032
Reopened #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-161122494
[jclouds-site-pull-requests
#394](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-site-pull-requests/394/)
SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54454709
to review your changes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54454813
Closed #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-161132054
Reopened #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-161132059
Go to
http://306ae818722ae6b78b92-2e69301a260e5804fbad8c2752c99931.r57.cf5.rackcdn.com/
to review your changes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54458152
Alright, problems with the PR build script seem fixed now. This also seems good
to merge. Should I merge it? Is there anything else that needs to be done? The
front page has a link to the blog I think.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Merge and publish!
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54484345
merged
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54491307
Website deployed. It seems to not be completely broken so far.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54493351
Closed #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-161253336
+host: %
+},
+{
+databases: [
+{
+name: sampledb
+}
+],
+host: %,
+name: demouser
+}
+]
+}
+{% endhighlight %}
+
+To parse the response,
+{
+databases: [
+{
+name: sampledb
+}
+],
+host: %,
+name: demouser
+}
+]
+}
+{% endhighlight %}
+
+To parse the response, jclouds uses [domain
+}
+]
+}
+{% endhighlight %}
+
+To parse the response, jclouds uses [domain
classes](https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/blob/master/apis/openstack-trove/src/main/java/org/jclouds/openstack/trove/v1/domain/User.java)
to represent the JSON data returned by the service. The
+
+To parse the response, jclouds uses [domain
classes](https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/blob/master/apis/openstack-trove/src/main/java/org/jclouds/openstack/trove/v1/domain/User.java)
to represent the JSON data returned by the service. The array of users is
unwrapped into individual
+Current implementations have the following two issues :
+
+1. Heavy use of map-binders and parsers to transform JSON. Map-binders use
annotation-selected classes to map method data (such as the data in the
create-user call above) to the JSON required by the service. The
+1. Heavy use of map-binders and parsers to transform JSON. Map-binders use
annotation-selected classes to map method data (such as the data in the
create-user call above) to the JSON required by the service. The
+
+In addition to fixing these issues, jclouds wants to provide developers with
some compiler checks and other syntactic sugar (fluent builders), while also
supporting different updating, creating, or listing validation strategies.
+
+We want to
+
+1. Ensure object immutability.
+2.
+
+We want to
+
+1. Ensure object immutability.
+2. Utilize the fluent builder pattern.
+3. Ensure that create objects can only be used for create; update for
update; and listed resources cannot be directly sent back to the service.
+4. Reuse code and keep domain classes
+Some [simpler
classes](https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/blob/master/openstack-neutron/src/main/java/org/jclouds/openstack/neutron/v2/domain/AddressPair.java)
implement the regular fluent builder pattern.
+
+In [other
+In this case, it was easy to add support for this call by using a [map
binder](https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/blob/master/apis/openstack-trove/src/main/java/org/jclouds/openstack/trove/v1/binders/BindCreateUserToJson.java).
+
+However, some APIs send or receive significantly more complex
Thanks, @zack-shoylev! Great to see more posts on the blog. Just a bunch of
minor comments, many of them around code font (or not) for things like classes.
I have no strong preference either way, but it would be good to be consistent
with other blog posts...
---
Reply to this email directly or
Already deployed it :) but will consider adding some more to illustrate the
create for create example.
About fonts: I don't like using that much outside code blocks, but I see what
you are saying with regards to consistency. Hmm.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Already deployed it :)
I noticed...but we can always apply a little edit here and there if we think
that's merited ;-)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54546199
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/rackerlabs/jclouds-site jclouds-domain-classes
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124
-- Commit Summary --
* Domain classes, better builders blog
to review your changes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54330496
[jclouds-site-pull-requests
#390](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-site-pull-requests/390/)
SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54330214
Reopened #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-160752549
Closed #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-160752544
[jclouds-site-pull-requests
#391](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-site-pull-requests/391/)
SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54346770
to review your changes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54346972
Reopened #124.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#event-160761654
[jclouds-site-pull-requests
#392](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-site-pull-requests/392/)
SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-site/pull/124#issuecomment-54349279
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+---
+author: Zack Shoylev
+comments: true
+date: 2014-09-03 23:00:00+00:00
+layout: post
+slug: better-builders-with-jclouds
+title: Better Builders with jclouds!
+---
+
+# Better Builders with jclouds
No need to repeat the title here.
---
Reply to this email
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+---
+author: Zack Shoylev
+comments: true
+date: 2014-09-03 23:00:00+00:00
+layout: post
+slug: better-builders-with-jclouds
+title: Better Builders with jclouds!
+---
+
+# Better Builders with jclouds
+
+If you are a new
+name: sampledb
+}
+],
+host: %,
+name: demouser
+}
+]
+}
+{% endhighlight %}
+
+To parse the response, jclouds uses [domain
38 matches
Mail list logo
