Benjamin Reed commented on ZOOKEEPER-113:

I don't think moving to an interface would help you have a pluggable ClientCnxn 
class. You still want all the logic for the sync and async code as well as the 
event threads from the ZooKeeper class. Making ClientCnxn an interface would be 
a reasonable thing to do once we have another implementation of the ClientCnxn.

> ZooKeeper.java should be interface not concrete class.
> ------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-113
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-113
>             Project: Zookeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: java client
>            Reporter: Patrick Hunt
> I think ZooKeeper class in src/java/main should be an interface rather than a 
> concrete class. Among other OO goodness this would give us more flexibility 
> when implementing tests on client code. Would also require something like a 
> factory to be created, which might actually work well with another JIRA we 
> have which is the idea to use a URI(s) rather than a host:port combination 
> when creating zookeeper clients.
> Unfortunately this would have a big impact on clients as it's not b/w 
> compatible (instantiating a new client that is).

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to