> On Dec 6, 2019, at 9:40 AM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > Regarding changing PoolManager to > an interface, I guess originally I wasn't thinking we would still be > backwards compatible if we did that. But as I think about it I think that > might be ok. One slight issue with that approach is that we have to come up > with new names for the methods - we can't have both an instance and a > static method with the same name and args. Maybe still worth it
Doh! I didn’t think about that. It sort of defeats the purpose of reusing the class. So going with a whole new class probably makes more sense to remove confusion. -Jake
