Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Flume >> mail # dev >> [DISCUSS] Annotating interface scope/stability in Flume

Copy link to this message
Re: [DISCUSS] Annotating interface scope/stability in Flume

On Aug 14, 2012, at 9:47 AM, Will McQueen wrote:

> Something to consider: Eclipse uses the string 'internal' in their package
> path to denote packages (public or otherwise) that are not intended to be
> used as a public API:
> "All packages that are part of the platform implementation but contain no
> API that should be exposed to ISVs are considered internal implementation
> packages. All implementation packages should be flagged as internal, with
> the tag occurring just after the major package name. ISVs will be told that
> all packages marked internal are out of bounds. (A simple text search for
> ".internal." detects suspicious reference in source files; likewise,
> "/internal/" is suspicious in .class files). "

FWIW, I also think this is a good idea.
> [Ref:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Naming_Conventions#Internal_Implementation_Packages]
> Here are some additional links on evolving Java APIs:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs_2
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs_3
>>> Flume configuration is actually pretty brittle
> FLUME-1051 might address this concern.
I'm not sure how. That issues seems more about guaranteeing validity than making the configuration provider more flexible.