You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cayenne.apache.org by Michael Gentry <mg...@masslight.net> on 2013/12/16 18:40:25 UTC
ServerRuntime Naming
I was just talking with someone converting from 3.0 to 3.1. He was really
confused by:
serverRuntime.getContext()
He kept saying he wanted a new one, not an existing one. I can kind of see
his point since getChannel(), getModules(), etc all return existing things.
Is this something we should consider renaming to createContext() or
newContext()?
mrg
Re: ServerRuntime Naming
Posted by John Huss <jo...@gmail.com>.
It was already renamed to "newContext" in 3.2 several months ago.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I think I was thrown off by this originally as well.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Michael Gentry <mg...@masslight.net>
> wrote:
> > I was just talking with someone converting from 3.0 to 3.1. He was
> really
> > confused by:
> >
> > serverRuntime.getContext()
> >
> > He kept saying he wanted a new one, not an existing one. I can kind of
> see
> > his point since getChannel(), getModules(), etc all return existing
> things.
> >
> > Is this something we should consider renaming to createContext() or
> > newContext()?
> >
> > mrg
>
Re: ServerRuntime Naming
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
I think I was thrown off by this originally as well.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Michael Gentry <mg...@masslight.net> wrote:
> I was just talking with someone converting from 3.0 to 3.1. He was really
> confused by:
>
> serverRuntime.getContext()
>
> He kept saying he wanted a new one, not an existing one. I can kind of see
> his point since getChannel(), getModules(), etc all return existing things.
>
> Is this something we should consider renaming to createContext() or
> newContext()?
>
> mrg