You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com> on 2002/09/06 17:28:28 UTC
[(Quick) VOTE] ContextManager.assumeOwnership
Realized that I made the method public by mistake.
/**
* Method to assume ownership of one of the managers the
* <code>ContextManager</code> created. Ownership means that the
* <code>ContextManager</code> is responsible for destroying the
* manager when the <code>ContextManager</code> is destroyed.
*
>>> * FIXME: Should this really be public? Also, we should throw a
>>> * NullPointerException instead.
*
* @param object The object being claimed
*
* @throws IllegalArgumentException if the object is null.
*/
public void assumeOwnership( Object o )
Ooops. Not supposed to be public - supposed to be private.
Do we just change it (any code using it deserves to get broken)
or leave it?
+1 for changing access modifier to private.
/LS
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [(Quick) VOTE] ContextManager.assumeOwnership
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
Done.
> From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:bloritsch@apache.org]
>
> +1
>
> > From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:mcconnell@apache.org]
> >
> > Leo Sutic wrote:
> >
> > >Realized that I made the method public by mistake.
> > >+1 for changing access modifier to private.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > +1
> >
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [(Quick) VOTE] ContextManager.assumeOwnership
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
+1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:mcconnell@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 11:34 AM
> To: Avalon Developers List
> Subject: Re: [(Quick) VOTE] ContextManager.assumeOwnership
>
>
>
>
> Leo Sutic wrote:
>
> >Realized that I made the method public by mistake.
> >
> > /**
> > * Method to assume ownership of one of the managers the
> > * <code>ContextManager</code> created. Ownership means that the
> > * <code>ContextManager</code> is responsible for destroying the
> > * manager when the <code>ContextManager</code> is destroyed.
> > *
> >
> >
> >>>> * FIXME: Should this really be public? Also, we should throw a
> >>>> * NullPointerException instead.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> > *
> > * @param object The object being claimed
> > *
> > * @throws IllegalArgumentException if the object is null.
> > */
> > public void assumeOwnership( Object o )
> >
> >Ooops. Not supposed to be public - supposed to be private.
> >
> >Do we just change it (any code using it deserves to get broken) or
> >leave it?
> >
> >+1 for changing access modifier to private.
> >
> >
>
> +1
>
> Fortress has not gone through a formal realease and the
> status is well
> documented on the home page:
>
> " This package is under development, and the API is not guaranteed
> to be the same when it is ready for release. You can find
> this in the
> excalibur-fortress-1.0.jar file if you want to play with
> it. Do not
> blame
> us if the next release of Excalibur breaks your code if
> you use this
> package."
>
>
> Cheers, Steve.
>
>
> >/LS
> >
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:avalon-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> >For
> additional commands,
> e-mail:
> ><ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Stephen J. McConnell
>
> OSM SARL
> digital products for a global economy
> mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
> http://www.osm.net
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:avalon-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For
> additional commands,
> e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [(Quick) VOTE] ContextManager.assumeOwnership
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Leo Sutic wrote:
>Realized that I made the method public by mistake.
>
> /**
> * Method to assume ownership of one of the managers the
> * <code>ContextManager</code> created. Ownership means that the
> * <code>ContextManager</code> is responsible for destroying the
> * manager when the <code>ContextManager</code> is destroyed.
> *
>
>
>>>> * FIXME: Should this really be public? Also, we should throw a
>>>> * NullPointerException instead.
>>>>
>>>>
> *
> * @param object The object being claimed
> *
> * @throws IllegalArgumentException if the object is null.
> */
> public void assumeOwnership( Object o )
>
>Ooops. Not supposed to be public - supposed to be private.
>
>Do we just change it (any code using it deserves to get broken)
>or leave it?
>
>+1 for changing access modifier to private.
>
>
+1
Fortress has not gone through a formal realease and the status is well
documented on the home page:
" This package is under development, and the API is not guaranteed
to be the same when it is ready for release. You can find this in the
excalibur-fortress-1.0.jar file if you want to play with it. Do not
blame
us if the next release of Excalibur breaks your code if you use this
package."
Cheers, Steve.
>/LS
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:mcconnell@osm.net
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>