> 3. On the matter of configure(): While it doesn't add any functionality, it > would be more consistent with other plugins if this interface extended > Configurable, and the InputStream was then passed via some other method > (`readFrom(InputStream)` perhaps). If nothing else it would make it harder > to overlook this interface when making changes which apply to all plugins. > To be honest, I'm not entirely convinced myself, but I thought we should at > least consider it and add it to the rejected alternatives if we decide > against it. Make sense. How about moving the `InputStream` from `configure` to `readRecord`? By that change, the `RecordReader` can be a subinterface of `Configurable`.
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java interface to replace '... Mickael Maison
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java interface to repl... Ismael Juma
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java interface to ... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java interface... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java inter... Federico Valeri
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new java ... Tom Bentley
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new j... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An new j... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Luke Chen
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Tom Bentley
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Alexandre Dupriez
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Alexandre Dupriez
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... Chia-Ping Tsai
- Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-641 An n... David Jacot