commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <>
Subject Re: [pool] why the composite pool implementation isn't plugable [was: picking descriptive class names]
Date Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:02:27 GMT
On 3/27/06, Sandy McArthur <> wrote:
> On 3/27/06, Rahul Akolkar <> wrote:
> >
> > Isn't the PoolableObjectFactory orthogonal to the four enum types you
> > mention? Those tune the FactoryConfig?
> Yes, hence the smiley.

Aha ;-)

> The implication for a programmer wanting a feature that isn't
> expressible with the enums is one of:
> * the programmer customizes one of the other existing ObjectPool
> implementations available to him already.
> * the programmer uses his ASL given right to customize and enhance the
> source to meet his needs. (If we're lucky he'll submit a patch back to
> us.)
> Neither of those are terrible, end of the world implications.
> Personally I think the second one is pretty good.

Thats always the case, and not everyone has the privilege of being
able to use unreleased home-brew versions.

> >
> > 2.1 because we'd rather get 2.0 out first, instead of waiting to try
> > out the ideas? If you guys think its appropriate, you might even move
> > that conversation here? Maybe others are interested as well; I am :-)
> > Plus it will give us better background while reading the commit
> > messages.
> Peter Steijn initiated the private email to me. It's up to him if he
> wants to discuss it on list. I will let him talk about his ideas for
> his thesis to whomever he chooses.

Ofcourse, wanted to let him know I was interested as well.

[Snipped good summary of some of the existing pool issues and
expectation out of first composite pool release].

> > P.S.- [pool] code is quite hard to read with all that horizontal
> > scrolling. Irrespective of the code already in place, maybe we should
> > stick to a reasonable (80?) character line width for new code?
> The code I contribute to apache is code I wrote for pleasure. The code
> I contribute is in the form that was most pleasurable for me to write
> in. I impose no restrictions on how others choose to write their code.
> If you wish to compensate me to write code differently or reject my
> contributions because of such trivial issues, that is fine. The ASL
> grants anyone the right reformat ASL licensed code however they see
> fit. I only request that I am not stripped of attribution for my
> contributions.


It was "merely a suggestion". Will address this in further detail in a
separate email, later.


> --
> Sandy McArthur
> "He who dares not offend cannot be honest."
> - Thomas Paine

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message