Github user bzz commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/1254
@khalidhuseynov glad to hear. But CI is red again, could you, as an author
of PR please post here the reason of failure? This will save time for the
reviewers.
And thank you for kind for the explanation!
> The point of this PR was not to send unnecessary info in the Revision
object
This is exactly what I meant by "changes for the sake of changes".
Revision class implementation that you point out looks good to me - it
represents clearly defined interface with it's own responsibilities. But String
does the contrary. May be this class is even big enough to deserve his own
file. And other clients may choose to replace it with their own
implementations. I would understand if you suggest to extract it to the
interface - this will bring even more flexibility (but increase verbosity).
But replacing it with the `String` does not look good to me.
After some thinking - may be I lack verbal skills to convey the message
about obejct-oriented design approach. If that is the case, please check `Item
50: Avoid strings where other types are more appropriate`, page 224 of
"Effective Java" 2nd edition and let me know.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
