Github user ashutakGG commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/incubator-griffin/pull/434#discussion_r224431040 --- Diff: measure/src/main/scala/org/apache/griffin/measure/configuration/dqdefinition/DQConfig.scala --- @@ -74,9 +74,9 @@ case class DQConfig(@JsonProperty("name") private val name: String, */ @JsonInclude(Include.NON_NULL) case class DataSourceParam( @JsonProperty("name") private val name: String, - @JsonProperty("baseline") private val baseline: Boolean, --- End diff -- No, it's not. But keeping fields with default values as last elements in case classes is kind of "best practice" in scala. For example, scala compilation fails for the following snippet of code ``` case class Foo(a: Int, b: Int = 22, c: Double) val foo = Foo(1, 3.3) ``` For this particular class we can avoid reordering. But I see more reasons to do it right and don't see any reasons to keep it as is (except we are scared to change any pice of code).
---