I think if Harry is offering to simply change method signatures that return raw Collection types into concrete ones, that would be just dandy. So +1 for that.
I also agree that when we make WikiEngine an interface (in whatever package we eventually select), we take only the worthiest of worthy methods when we do that. So +1 for that, too. The two aren't mutually exclusive: in the short term, if Harry is willing to do the Collection method signatures, I certainly won't discourage him. :) On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Janne Jalkanen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Kinda. We should review each method whether it a) should be there in 3.0, > and b) whether it makes sense to return something else than a Collection. > > My preferred way would be to make WikiEngine an interface, and only take > those methods that we feel to be "worthy" into it. > > /Janne > > On 25 Feb 2009, at 22:18, Harry Metske wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> the WikiEngine (and other classes) currently have methods returning raw >> type >> Collections, causing compile warnings. >> Any objections if I change those to strong typed ones (mostly >> Collection<String> ) ? >> >> regards, >> Harry > >
