On 24 September 2013 14:56, Hardy Ferentschik <ha...@hibernate.org> wrote: > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 3:16 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> wrote: > >> On 24 September 2013 13:46, Hardy Ferentschik <ha...@hibernate.org> wrote: >>> Cool, we seem to agree on almost everything now :-) >> >> +1 it's hard to get convergence when the thread explodes exponentially >> on several different subjects but it seems it was worth it. >> thanks for the huge energy and ideas :-) > > I agree. It was quite some effort, but it was worth it. > >>>>> 5) rename 'getShardIdentifier' to 'getShardIdentifierForAddition' >>>> >>>> Is that needed? I thought that by removing the conflicting method >>>> there would be no further need to clarify the method. I'd propose to >>>> keep the method name as is, we still have the javadocs asset to >>>> clarify how this is all being used for the apprehensive user. >>> >>> Not necessarily. Just thought it is more symmetric with >>> getShardIdentifierForQuery. >>> The name implies to a certain degree where the method is used. I can go >>> either way on this one. >> >> Let's keep the current name. I'm pretty sure we won't use it just for >> additions (updates for one), >> as it really is *the* method defining the relationship function >> Document -> shard. > > ok > >> The name of getShardIdentifierForQuery is exceptional because it >> really is geared for Query, >> providing filtering capabilities. > > hmm
come on, the "agreement progress bar" got stuck at 99,97% ?? :-D > > --Hardy _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
