Hola, sorry but I don't understand which is the relation between renaming fields and checkstyle rules. Was there a rule that check '_' prefix in the fields name? IIUC, there wasn't. Have a nice WE! Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchi...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Simo, > fields renaming was what I did in order to fix the change styles issue > (otherwise I would have never changed the field name). > I though it seems reasonable looking the other commit messages (see > http://goo.gl/TThpd). > > > Twitter :http://www.twitter.com/m_cucchiara > G+ :https://plus.google.com/107903711540963855921 > Linkedin :http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriziocucchiara > > Maurizio Cucchiara > > > > On 29 October 2011 13:46, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> wrote: >> that's a fields renaming more than checkstyle issues, just to properly >> record changes. >> Anyway I like it, variables prefixed with '_' look so '90 to me :) >> Thanks for taking care! > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
