I guess we have different opinions about the bounds of TC API, not that that matters much actually. TerracottaReadWriteLock is fine though.
Chris On Jun 3, 2010, at 11:34 AM, Geert Bevin wrote: > Euhm, I'm talking about our concrete implementation, not about > adding a new interface name. SharedReadWriteLock implements > ReadWriteLock, I'm merely suggesting to rename SharedReadWriteLock > to TerracottaReadWriteLock since 'shared' has no real meaning. > > On 03 Jun 2010, at 17:32, Chris Dennis wrote: > >> I have no problem with either... I guess which we go with depends on >> how likely we thing it is that a third party decides to implement our >> API. > > -- > 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
