[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAMAYA-254?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15896164#comment-15896164
]
Oliver B. Fischer commented on TAMAYA-254:
------------------------------------------
BTW, I think 4 hours is to little time for this. We have to write tests and
check all modules in core and in the extensions for code relaying on the
current implementation of meta-data.
> Clarify PropertyValue API
> -------------------------
>
> Key: TAMAYA-254
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAMAYA-254
> Project: Tamaya
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: API
> Affects Versions: 0.2-incubating
> Reporter: Anatole Tresch
> Assignee: Anatole Tresch
> Fix For: 0.3-incubating
>
> Original Estimate: 4h
> Remaining Estimate: 4h
>
> The API of the {{PropertyValue}} value object should be clearl separated into
> * a {{key, value}} part representing a configuration entry.
> * a meta-data {{Map<String,String>}}
> * a {{PropertyValueBuilder toBuilder()}} method to create a mutable builder
> from a value.
> Additionally the corresponding {{PropertyValueBuilder}} must have methods to
> * change an entries _key_, _value_ and _meta-data entries.
> As a side effect the concrete representation of meta-data, be it in form of
> specialized config entries, be it in as separately accessible artifacts can
> be postponed, since additional entries are independently stored in a separate
> datastructure by the property sources returning any property values.
> Additionally since meta-data entries are highly cohesive with the data data,
> property values help to ensure that only the relevant meta-data for a certain
> config entry is returned in a final configuration instance (the current
> solution quickly looses control on which entries are belonging to the current
> evaluated config key, value pair, since meta-entries are mixed up with the
> ordinary config entries).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
