even better :)
On 21/10/2007, at 1:05 AM, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
Well, you do have a point there.
If the passed in repoId matches on either a sourceId or a targetId,
then the proxy connector should be deleted.
wdyt?
- Joakim
Brett Porter wrote:
ugh, I obviously need new eyes. two times in a row I've read the
variables back to front :D
On 20/10/2007, at 6:41 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
pass the repo id in as a parameter?
It's not a lot of code, no big deal, it's just that I noticed the
other was already factored into a method and these classes had
recently been emphasised as needing to share more code :)
- Brett
On 20/10/2007, at 2:07 PM, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
You'd think so, but the rule is different.
One removes based on connector.sourceId and the other removes
based on connector.targetId
Guess I could bring out the commons-collection's Predicates
again to make a common base method. ;-)
- Joakim
Brett Porter wrote:
On 20/10/2007, at 8:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ // [MRM-520] Proxy Connectors are not deleted with
the deletion of a Repository.
+ List<ProxyConnectorConfiguration> proxyConnectors =
getProxyConnectors();
+ for ( ProxyConnectorConfiguration proxyConnector :
proxyConnectors )
+ {
+ if ( StringUtils.equals
( proxyConnector.getSourceRepoId(), cleanupRepository.getId() ) )
+ {
+ archivaConfiguration.getConfiguration
().removeProxyConnector( proxyConnector );
+ }
+ }
Shouldn't this duplication be in the common base class?
- Brett
--
Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
--
- Joakim Erdfelt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Open Source Software (OSS) Developer
--
Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
--
Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
--
- Joakim Erdfelt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Open Source Software (OSS) Developer
--
Brett Porter - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
