You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Dmitry Pavlenko <pa...@tmatesoft.com> on 2016/03/08 17:35:19 UTC
[PATCH] Make constructors of JavaHL classes public
Hello!
I would ask you to make some JavaHL contructors public, so it would be possible to implement JavaHL more easily. Once you were so kind to do that
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201309.mbox/%3C201309041617.25159.pavlenko@tmatesoft.com%3E
and I'm asking you to do that once again.
[[[
Make constructors of LocationSegment and FileRevision publc.
* subversion/bindings/javahl/src/org/apache/subversion/javahl/ISVNRemote.java
(LocationSegment): Make constructor public.
(FileRevision): Make constructor public.
]]]
[[[
Index: subversion/bindings/javahl/src/org/apache/subversion/javahl/ISVNRemote.java
===================================================================
--- subversion/bindings/javahl/src/org/apache/subversion/javahl/ISVNRemote.java (revision 1734105)
+++ subversion/bindings/javahl/src/org/apache/subversion/javahl/ISVNRemote.java (working copy)
@@ -507,9 +507,9 @@ public interface ISVNRemote
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
/**
- * Private constructor called by the native implementation.
+ * Constructor called by the native implementation.
*/
- private LocationSegment(String path,
+ public LocationSegment(String path,
long startRevision,
long endRevision)
{
@@ -594,9 +594,9 @@ public interface ISVNRemote
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
/**
- * Private constructor called by the native implementation.
+ * Constructor called by the native implementation.
*/
- private FileRevision(String path, long revision,
+ public FileRevision(String path, long revision,
boolean resultOfMerge,
Map<String, byte[]> revisionProperties,
Map<String, byte[]> propertiesDelta,
]]]
Dmitry Pavlenko
Re: [PATCH] Make constructors of JavaHL classes public
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 08.03.2016 22:40, Dmitry Pavlenko wrote:
> Yes, it would be enough, thanks!
>
>> On 08.03.2016 17:35, Dmitry Pavlenko wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>> I would ask you to make some JavaHL contructors public, so it would be
>>> possible to implement JavaHL more easily. Once you were so kind to do
>>> that
>>>
>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201309.mbox/%3C2
>>> 01309041617.25159.pavlenko@tmatesoft.com%3E
>>>
>>> and I'm asking you to do that once again.
>> Would it work for you if we make the constructors package-scope instead
>> of public? You'd still be able to create the objects in your
>> implementation; but the user-facing API really shouldn't allow object
>> creation in these cases.
>>
>> -- Brane
It's been a while ... but this change is on trunk now (r1739704) and
will be released in 1.10. If you find any more instances that could
profit from a private to package-scope constructor change, please let me
know.
-- Brane
Re: [PATCH] Make constructors of JavaHL classes public
Posted by Dmitry Pavlenko <pa...@tmatesoft.com>.
Yes, it would be enough, thanks!
> On 08.03.2016 17:35, Dmitry Pavlenko wrote:
> > Hello!
> > I would ask you to make some JavaHL contructors public, so it would be
> > possible to implement JavaHL more easily. Once you were so kind to do
> > that
> >
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201309.mbox/%3C2
> > 01309041617.25159.pavlenko@tmatesoft.com%3E
> >
> > and I'm asking you to do that once again.
>
> Would it work for you if we make the constructors package-scope instead
> of public? You'd still be able to create the objects in your
> implementation; but the user-facing API really shouldn't allow object
> creation in these cases.
>
> -- Brane
Re: [PATCH] Make constructors of JavaHL classes public
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 08.03.2016 17:35, Dmitry Pavlenko wrote:
> Hello!
> I would ask you to make some JavaHL contructors public, so it would be possible to implement JavaHL more easily. Once you were so kind to do that
>
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201309.mbox/%3C201309041617.25159.pavlenko@tmatesoft.com%3E
>
> and I'm asking you to do that once again.
Would it work for you if we make the constructors package-scope instead
of public? You'd still be able to create the objects in your
implementation; but the user-facing API really shouldn't allow object
creation in these cases.
-- Brane