Eyal Blum
Eyal Blum
Yeah, I would check in a binary On Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 6:05 PM Yang wrote: > Hmm looks like there's no published artifact yet and it requires maven 🙃?...
Thanks for engaging with us on how to improve the API! > First of all, StoreResponse.NoNewData has a variable origin: ResponseOrigin This is indeed unfortunate, but I wanted to minimized...
see #230 for a proposal to simplify the API
proposed data flow: https://www.lucidchart.com/invitations/accept/264350eb-27f2-43c9-bf50-2ef7f33e44df
I personally would vote for adding update support to Store. It feels like a missing core usecase of a repository pattern. Given how disjoined the read support and the write...
Ok lets assume we're going to support write from a separate entry point (let's call it `WriteStore` for until we come up with a better name). There are 2 general...
OK I think that could work. We'll maintained to concept of `baseValue` which could be updated locally and also the local modification log. in case of conflict we will fetch...
Interesting "bug". We accept a flowing source of truth but don't update the cache live unless there's an active collector. Intended behavior but I wonder if we can/should do better?...
I don't quite follow. when would we return a blank value? Did you mean to comment on #175?
The issue here is that we don't read from a SoT into the cache unless there's an active downsteam, so a new downsteam will see a cached value even if...