On 08/26/2011 04:52 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Modified: karaf/cellar/trunk/hazelcast/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/cellar/hazelcast/factory/HazelcastServiceFactory.java URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/karaf/cellar/trunk/hazelcast/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/cellar/hazelcast/factory/HazelcastServiceFactory.java?rev=1162249&r1=1162248&r2=1162249&view=diff ============================================================================== --- karaf/cellar/trunk/hazelcast/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/cellar/hazelcast/factory/HazelcastServiceFactory.java (original) +++ karaf/cellar/trunk/hazelcast/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/cellar/hazelcast/factory/HazelcastServiceFactory.java Fri Aug 26 20:52:08 2011 @@ -44,6 +44,21 @@ public class HazelcastServiceFactory imppublic void setUsername(String username) { - this.username = username; + if (username != null) { + this.username = username; + } } public String getPassword() { @@ -321,7 +359,9 @@ public class HazelcastServiceFactory imp } public void setPassword(String password) { - this.password = password; + if (password != null) { + this.password = password; + } }
Are you sure you want to implement it this way (retain the old username and password if the caller tries to set either to "null"?) I'm not sure how username and password are being used here, but if the caller sets the username and password to "null" that's usually (?) to indicate that no more authorizations (actions) are wanted--to refuse everything afterwards. But with the above implementation in order to accomplish the same thing you'd need to set bogus non-zero-length usernames and passwords instead--something strange to be encouraging.
Glen -- Glen Mazza Talend - http://www.talend.com/ai Blog - http://www.jroller.com/gmazza Twitter - glenmazza
