The best practice for patches is to have them separate - one for the bug
fix, another for the other changes. That makes it easier for the
committers to review.
-Adrian
BJ Freeman wrote:
Thanks for that point.
so only make changes for the immediate problems for clarity.
for my own information.
would it be ok to provide a patch for the bug and also provide a patch
to update since I am looking at the module anyway.
or should we just have a refactoring jira to do that?
Adrian Crum sent the following on 7/24/2008 9:45 AM:
BJ,
In the example you used, I was fixing a bug, so I included only the
changes needed to fix the bug. I could have updated the entire class to
use the Java 5 Generics, but that would have obscured the changes needed
to fix the bug.
-Adrian
BJ Freeman wrote:
Thanks I was seeing both in the commits so was not sure.
Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 7/24/2008 6:17 AM:
If you use an editor like Eclipse there are auto-completion suggestions
1) would be
Map<String, Object> result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
2) would be
Map<String, Object> bodyParameters = (Map<String, Object>)
serviceContext.remove("bodyParameters");
A bit verbose, but this how things are going in Java, clearly its more
secure. It's like when you are checking in on a plane : longer but,
normally, safer...
Jacques
From: "BJ Freeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I see this
- Map result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
+ Map<String, Object> result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
and I see this
+ Map bodyParameters = (Map)
serviceContext.remove("bodyParameters");
for the left side which is the best practice?
