On Mon 26 Sep 2011 11:09:56 AM CDT, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > For 2, > The hard part is to understand when a given registry is used and for what > purpose.
Not sure I understand what you mean here. Used in what way? For lookups? Well the lookups are hierarchical. Thats not an issue at all imho. In terms of constructing? I just described when each is used. And certainly "bootstrap" leaves little interpretation imho. And honestly, the 3rd one is really an implementation detail that users should never see. Not sure what other name is more appropriate for the SessionFactoryServiceRegistryImpl one anyway; SessionFactoryAwareServiceRegistryImpl? So really we have this "bootstrap" registry and the "other" one to name properly. And as for the actual constructing, I think the API does a decent job of directing that. A org.hibernate.service.ServiceRegistryBuilder is the thing users utilize to build these registries. There are 2 forms of constructing said builder: one is no arg and the other accepts a BootstrapServiceRegistryImpl. But if I am simply being "defensive" of my design, NOW is the time to address any real shortcomings. I just don't see that particular issue. I do see the names as confusing, particularly the "basic" one. > In a way Basic, Main, Core, Generic (the alternate names I can think of) are > not telling very much. The Basic registry holds services that are used at > most stages of Hibernate. Would Global make any sense? > Second best thing would be to Javadoc them a bit more to solve the problem. I agree those terms do not shed much light on its function. But really, what is its function? It is the registry that holds the main/standard set of Hibernate services. Really the non-special services if you look at it from the perspective that the other 2 registries are special purpose. Global is completely inappropriate imo. I think it sets the wrong impression. Global in what way? Especially when you consider that Hibernate historically used the term "global" to discuss class-loader-static configuration settings. Thats definitely not the case here. > As far as the additional CR, That's a good question. I have no opinion. I'd > say it depends if you have time :) I guess it depends whether the user-facing API is affected which it probably would be if we renamed one/more of these. I'd rather get it right for 4.0 versus 4.x -- st...@hibernate.org http://hibernate.org _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
