State of the Dynamodb package

[lostghost]

How willing are you to accept aggressive changes to the dynamodb library that change the exposed interface? Obviously changing or removing exported types and functions would impact anyone currently using this package, but the current state of this library feels pretty incomplete and like it should probably be in the /exp/ directory at the moment.

Before I make major changes to the library and submit pull requests, how willing are you to break from the current interface, assuming that the new interface provides the correct functionality in a clearer and more concise way?

[crowdmatt]

Willing to break current interface for a cleaner set of code. As long as
we don't regress in terms of functionality. Marshal & Unmarshal in
particular as I rely heavily on those features.

I'm not a huge fan of the way the old /exp/ directory structure was setup
-- honestly, everything is "exp" in a way.

Best,

Matt

Matthew Moore
Co-Founder & iCEO, CrowdMob Inc.
Mobile: (650) 888-5962

Need to schedule a meeting? Invite me via Google Calendar!
matt@crowdmob.com

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ken Walters notifications@github.comwrote:

How willing are you to accept aggressive changes to the dynamodb library
that change the exposed interface? Obviously changing or removing exported
types and functions would impact anyone currently using this package, but
the current state of this library feels pretty incomplete and like it
should probably be in the /exp/ directory at the moment.

Before I make major changes to the library and submit pull requests, how
willing are you to break from the current interface, assuming that the new
interface provides the correct functionality in a clearer and more concise
way?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/crowdmob/goamz/issues/16
.

[lostghost]

Agreed. The ability to marshal and unmarshal types directly into and out of Dynamo is critical.

Thanks,
Ken