Jcr-Server: Changing IOHandler interface ? (JCR-407)

[Angela Schreiber <an...@day.com>]

hi all

in jira issue JCR-407 jérémi suggested to extend
the resource config present with the simple server.
instead of just defining the IOManager (which knows
about all its handlers) the user should be able to
define the set of IOHandlers in the configuration as
well.

my initial suggestion would be to extend the IOHandler
interface by a 'setIOManager(IOManager)' method in order
to reflect the changed objective (configurable set of
handlers).
alternatively the we could think about introducing
some sort of factory.

what is the general feeling?
suggestions and better solutions are welcome.

regards
angela


ps for jérémi:

jeremi joslin wrote:
> I just do like this because I don't want to change the interface. Like
> I do, that will not broke the compatibility with someone who create
> his own IOManager or IOHandler. But if you don't care about this, yes,
> your design is better.

in fact i do care. but i know that the protected constructor
in the DefaultManager is the result of my own lazyness and making
it public doesn't make it any better. maybe it's better to re-
consider the api in order to reflect the changed target, than
forcing the existing, insufficient implementation to behave
differently.