You mean commit in a branch ? Not sure to understand what you mean ? 2018-05-31 23:29 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Valliere <john...@apache.org>:
> From a codebase stability perspective, maybe you should commit a version > number with the bug fixes. Then do the refactoring in its own version > number as to not confuse the two when trying to figure out if the > refactoring broke something or if the previous bug fixes broke something? > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Lyor Goldstein <lgoldst...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >>> > I disagree with the characterization that they do not have a "real > > concept > > > behind them" they represent contracts of entities that have similar > > > attributes. IMO, all the various *XxxHolder*(s) represent an entity > that > > > provides whatever these "attribute" interfaces hold. > > > > >>> Well, I would agree on this principle in theory. > > However, I've seen no evidence throughout the code that this is actually > > useful. > > > > Here is something that I see as a useful consequence of these "marker" > > interfaces - some degree of standardization: e.g., if more than 1 entity > > displays the same "behavior" and/or "attributes", it makes sense to call > > them by some standard name - e.g., avoid *getSession, getClientSession, > > getCurrentSession, getEstablishedSession* in different entities that > > basically expose a *ClientSession*. To me it is another aspect of the > > D.R.Y. principle since it makes it easier to search for code that refers > to > > a known entity knowing that it will use a standard way to expose it. > > > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet
