On 20 Oct 2011, at 11:27, Greg Stein wrote: > On Oct 18, 2011 11:12 AM, "Greg Stein" <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >... > > The short answer: my branch puts connection management into the > > transport, and Brett's patches puts that into the client. A decision > > needs to be made, and that will determine future work. I've previously > > emailed with an explanation for why I believe the transport class > > should handle this (via a connection manager), and why (IMO) the > > client should not be worrying about it. Making this decision removes > > blocks for future changes (eg. timeouts). > > Thoughts, Russell? > >
/me thinks " The Java client puts connection management down in the transport layer. It makes sense to me. I had a chat with Reid Draper about it (he is much more pythonic than me), he concurs. I just need to do a bit more reading through the code, and unless anyone here objects (anyone? class? anyone?), I'll start work at merging your fork into the Basho repo so we can get back on track. Thanks a lot for your time and patience on this Greg, we're lucky to have you. Cheers Russell " > Cheers, > -g > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
