[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [dsdp-tm-dev] Committers please vote: API changes on RSE?
|
+1, for the same reasons. Better pre 1.0 than later.
---------------------------
Dave Dykstal
dykstal@xxxxxxx
On Oct 19, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Martin Oberhuber wrote:
Dear committers,
Dave McKnight has proposed an API change to the
IRemoteFileSubSystem and IRemoteProcessSubSystem in order to add
progress monitors to some method calls, such that there is a chance
to cancel long running operations.
My personal take is, that although its already very late in the
game I'd like to accept such API changes because it appears that
1. We dont have many clients on openRSE yet. At least none that I'd
know of.
2. Those API changes appear simple and straightforward.
3. API changes will become much more difficult than now as soon as
we have 1.0 released, so better do it now than in the future.
4. The API changes will enable our users to write interruptable
services, i.e. allow something not possible today. So even if our
own services are not all interruptable yet, it's important to open
up the API for allowing interruptable services in the future.
Considering all this, I'm voting +1.
Committers please cast your votes.
Thanks
Martin
David McKnight schrieb:
1) I did consider putting this to a vote but then thought it was
too trivial a change for that. It was really something that
should have been done from the start but it was an oversight. At
this point I haven't committed anything since I wanted to see the
reaction to my email and I guess that was a good thing.
2) I was wondering about the order of arguments too - I suppose
the last argument is consistent with RSE, although, I'm not sure
how consistent it is with other things. I guess the natural thing
would be to place it at the end. I would like to make the
corresponding changes to the list*() APIs for
IRemoteProcessSubSystem as well. I'm still not sure whether we
should have monitors for all the methods right now without taking
a closer look at their usages. I'm wondering if maybe we ought
to phase this in two parts: first to deal with queries (the most
obvious case) and second phase to deal with the other subsystem
calls. Any thoughts on that?
Before getting into the details, I suppose we may as well have a
vote on whether or not we should make any API changes at this point.
____________________________________
David McKnight Phone: 905-413-3902 , T/L: 969-3902
Internet: dmcknigh@xxxxxxxxxx
Mail: D1/140/8200/TOR
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
_______________________________________________
dsdp-tm-dev mailing list
dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-tm-dev