Does not allow multiple implementations of the data access API in the classpath.

[nicmx]

Does not allow multiple implementations of the data access API in the classpath.

[jcanomx]

How about this, if the RDAP Server finds 2 implementations of the data access API, the default implementation and a new one, the Server will automatically give preference to the later one. This way, you don’t have to remove the default implementation of the classpath or configure anything.

Now the question here is what happens if the Server finds 3 or more implementations? Should the Server throw the exception and shut itself down?

[ydahhrk]

How about this, if the RDAP Server finds 2 implementations of the data access API, the default implementation and a new one, the Server will automatically give preference to the later one.

Fair enough.

what happens if the Server finds 3 or more implementations?

Why not use the file?

I think of your idea as a reasonable fallback strategy in case some ambiguity can be worked around, but I don't see how preventing the user from keeping many implementations in the classpath (with a simple swap switch) helps anyone.

[jcanomx]

All right then, let’s keep the fallback strategy, and use a configuration parameter to allow the user to select from multiple implementations. I’m still think is a little odd that someone might need multiple custom implementations in the classpath, but then again this solution is easy to implement and gives the user more options.

[ydahhrk]

How about this, if the RDAP Server finds 2 implementations of the data access API, the default implementation and a new one, the Server will automatically give preference to the later one. This way, you don’t have to remove the default implementation of the classpath or configure anything.

Just to clarify: The default implementation depends on the data access API (which is where the implementation loader sits right now), not the other way around, so the implementation loader is incapable of recognizing the default implementation among several candidates. After an off-thread discussion, we decided not to implement this feature.