Was just fixing up already existing tests to use the new name. Thinking
about it, I guess ClusterToolkit sounds a bit better, at least to me,
than ClusteringToolkit.
See snippet below:
*ClusteringToolkit getClusteringToolkit() {*
return new ExpressToolkit(terracottaUrl);
}
v/s
*ClusterToolkit getClusterToolkit() {*
return new ExpressToolkit(terracottaUrl);
}
When using the api, i think i like "ClusterToolkit getClusterToolkit()"
more.
Anyone have any strong feelings ?
-- Abhishek
On 5/20/10 11:10 PM, Geert Bevin wrote:
Ok, to I went for ClusteringToolkit as the interface and ExpressToolkit to
replace StandaloneClusteringProvider. This has been committed.
On 20 May 2010, at 13:07, Sergio Bossa wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Geert Bevin<gbe...@terracottatech.com> wrote:
StandaloneClusteringProvider isn't an interface :-)
Obviously, I didn't mean "java interface", but more generally "class
name + public methods".
Anyways, "Toolkit" and "ExpressToolkit" are good enough, go with it ;)
Cheers,
Sergio B.
--
Sergio Bossa
http://www.linkedin.com/in/sergiob
_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
tc-dev@lists.terracotta.org
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
--
Geert Bevin
Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org
_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
tc-dev@lists.terracotta.org
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
_______________________________________________
tc-dev mailing list
tc-dev@lists.terracotta.org
http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
