Github user olegz commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/169#discussion_r49540950
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/AbstractConfiguredComponent.java
---
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ public AbstractConfiguredComponent(final
ConfigurableComponent component, final
this.component = component;
this.validationContextFactory = validationContextFactory;
this.serviceProvider = serviceProvider;
+ this.name = new
AtomicReference<>(component.getClass().getSimpleName());
--- End diff --
That's kind of how it was and yes, this is me trying to "extract an answer
by force" ;). I don't see a reason why it would have to be initialized to null
while defaulting to class name in sub-class, but I also do see a "safety" point
in your comment. I am good either way. Do you think we need @markap14 or
anyone else to chip in with opinion?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
