I'm voting more for the idea of putting like things together than any particular arrangement. I think jmx utils does not make sense with split hashamp - would make more sense to put collections together.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Kunal Bhasin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jonas Bonér" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Geert Bevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:21:17 PM (GMT-0600) America/Chicago Subject: Re: [tc-dev] Code layout What does jmx utils have to do with split hashmap? Why would they be packaged together? On Feb 12, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Alex Miller wrote: > I'd vote for the balanced set #2. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Taylor Gautier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jonas Bonér" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Geert Bevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >, "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kunal Bhasin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >, "Juris Galang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jason Voegele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >, [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:54:56 PM (GMT-0600) America/Chicago > Subject: Code layout > > > There have been a number of utility like and pattern like > implementations going into forge/labs. I have been thinking about > how best to organize these things. Here's my thinking to date, I'm > open to suggestions or just voting for one of the options below. > > At the moment I know of: > > > > • ResourceManager - a pair of classes that level a shared > resource across a cluster (relies on JMX util) > • Pipes/Channels - refactoring of the pipe/channel idea in m/w > • Master/Worker - work load balancer > • JMX Util - JMX event util classes > • Annotations - annotations > • SplitHashMap - rough equivalent of concurrenthashmap > • TimeSeriesMap - to expire items in a map based on time entries > So, I am not sure, I can argue a few different layouts: > > 1) All in one package. On the one extreme, this makes using any TC > based util class (or pattern) really easy. Until there is too much > in one package, this what I prefer, except it tends to have version > creep that doesn't correspond to relevant features - in other words > a developer uses it only for JMX, but the version bumps because of a > fix for annotations > > 2) A Balanced set of packages. I would propose > > > • tc-util - contains pipe/channel, resourcemanager, jmxutil, > splithashmap, timeseriesmap > • annotations - annotations only > • master/woker - m/w only, but needs tc-util for both pipe/ > channel and jmx > > 3) Lots of little packages - basically everything in its own > package. This is my least favorite option. > > > > Thoughts? > > _______________________________________________ > tc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
