On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Kresten Krab Thorup <k...@trifork.com> wrote: > We are using those APIs in our new stuff for riak sync/mobile. My problem > with your change would be that we have a mock riak_client which is super > convenient for unit testing, and it would be good to still be able to have > that somehow. Our mock is just an eta-backed parameterized module which has > put/get/mapred_bucket/etc. ....
Hi, Kresten. I can see how unit tests like you describe could be more challenging with the breakup I proposed. In case the link isn't obvious now, this is the driver behind my desire to move things around (Riak Pipe): http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/2011-June/004550.html My main thought was that keeping all of the code separate, right up to the external interface layer, would reduce confusion during any transition from the legacy system to the pipe-based system. Would you mind taking a look at the changes I was thinking about to support this inside Riak? I have a branch + [unreviewed] pull request going here: https://github.com/beerriot/riak_kv/pull/8 Or if I could take a look at your mock system, maybe I could help with some suggestions for moving in the direction I proposed? We are generally trying to move toward more well-defined APIs (such as PBC/HTTP) and to discourage people from using distributed Erlang to interact with Riak. Thanks, Bryan _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
