Jean T. Anderson (JIRA) wrote:
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12482424 ]
Jean T. Anderson commented on DERBY-2458:
-----------------------------------------
So I'm a little confused by the "Patch generally looks good but it's good to have clear
& logical naming."
I guess it meant that I wasn't prepared to commit it at the time. I
should have been clearer, something like '+0.9 to commit'. :-)
Is this patch ready to commit? If so, I'll go ahead and do so,
> Or do you want the naming changed first?
That's up to you or any other committer. If a committer trusts a change
they can commit it. Any other committer with a different opinion has a
number of choices if a patch is committed:
- make the changes themselves after it is committed
- enter a bug and hope it gets addressed
- hope the contributor addresses outstanding concerns after the commit
- not worry about any concerns they raised
- veto the patch
So if I'd have said '+0.9 to commit' one could have probably guessed
that I wouldn't veto the patch. :-)
Would it be sufficient for me to change the JDBC.assertColumnTypes to
JDBC.assertParameterTypes when it's committed?
I think that's up to you. I did consider changing the name in the patch,
but changes that seem simple have a habit of requiring more work than
one thinks and at the time I didn't have time to fully look at it
(changing the name, fixing up comments etc.)
Dan.
