On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 10:18 AM Michael Osipov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 2018-10-03 um 16:55 schrieb Gary Gregory: > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 7:17 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 15:34 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: > >>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:09 PM Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On October 2, 2018 9:57:40 PM GMT+02:00, Michael Osipov < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> Am 2018-10-01 um 16:33 schrieb Gary Gregory: > >>>>>> Also, since we are here, in the same place: "Header > >>>>>> getSingleHeader(String)", could be be "getHeader(String)"; > >>>>>> since the > >>>>>> "Single" is implied by the singular "Header" in the API name > >>>>>> _and_ by > >>>>> > >>>>> the > >>>>>> return type. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thoughts on that one? > >>>>> > >>>>> Makes sense to me. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> That will break a lot of people's code. Please at the very least > >>>> deprecate > >>>> all methods. > >>>> > >>> > >>> IMO, deprecating code from one beta to another is over the top and > >>> when do > >>> you remove the methods, in another beta? > >>> > >> > >> I imagine such methods could be removed at any point before the first > >> GA release. > >> > >> I do not understand why making an upgrade to the next BETA simpler for > >> every single HC 5.0 user out there is not worth one extra commit. > >> > > > > Good idea. In git master: > > > > * Deprecate and rename > > org.apache.hc.core5.http.EndpointDetails.getSocketTimeout() to > > getSocketTimeoutMillis(). > > I am not a huge fan of having the value scaling as part of the method > name. An overload as getSocketTimeout(TimeUnit) would not work anymore. > Not having the scale is a recipe for disaster -- I'm being dramatic :-) We already have scale in other APIs. Nothing prevents you from adding getSocketTimeout(TimeUnit), so what if it's not an overload? What matters is that it would be an easy API to understand IMO. Gary
