Sounds like a plan. Thanks
Adrian Crum sent the following on 7/24/2008 10:18 AM:
> 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?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
