Firstly: I 100% support the goals of this separated design! (Just in case that's not clear)

Re naming, I think we should be describing what it does: e.g. Core::Repositories::RemoteContentService, or maybe Core::Repositories::RemoteContentRepository

----------------------------
Sent from my phone

> On 12 Feb 2014, at 19:48, Pablo Manrubia <notifications@github.com> wrote:
> 
> In lib/core/repositories/api.rb:
> 
> > @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
> > +require 'faraday'
> > +require 'faraday/request/request_id'
> > +require 'forwardable'
> > +
> > +module Core
> > +  module Repositories
> > +    class API
> To my understanding: this is connector to a RESTService.
> 
> This is not a repository, it does not belongs to Core, and this is not business logic. So Why namespace it with Core and Repository?
> I'd go for something like:
> 
> Remote::Connector::RESTService
> So we can place under connectors proxys to different systems like REST, SOAP, ESB (this is a pretty common pattern in software architecture) And is indeed decoupled from FrontEnd just by the root scope (which describes what it does)
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.