Wai has asked about this discussion, let's wait to see what he has to say
Jacques
Le 04/09/2017 à 08:22, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
It's not a matter of impact, it's a matter of principle. You don't leave
code in a worse state for no valid reason. People are working very hard to
refactor the code to decrease the entropy, not increase it.
On Sep 3, 2017 3:45 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Reverted at revision: 1807142
I did not thought that changing from private to "no modifier" there would
have a such impact on dev ML
It's right that Wai did not give any justifications. Let's see if he will...
Jacques
Le 03/09/2017 à 11:20, Michael Brohl a écrit :
+1
Additionally, I think such modifications should not be made in a hurry.
They should wait for committer/contributor reactions or be (briefly)
discussed before being committed. In this case, the the time between issue
creation and the commit was just a few hours, no chance for objections.
We had similar discussions in the past - PLEASE be more careful about such
changes.
Thanks and regards,
Michael
Am 03.09.17 um 10:50 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
I see two things which happened here:
1- a modification on the code base to accommodate one person working on
their own project
2- The modification exposes internals which makes the system more fragile
for no added value.
I recommend a revert, and I believe the one who committed is the one who
should revert, not others. Inviting people to "feel free" to revert your
work does not make much sense and takes away from their time which they
already spent reviewing your code.
On Sep 3, 2017 10:18 AM, "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Paul,
That's a good idea, please feel free to enhance or revert
Thanks
Jacques
Le 03/09/2017 à 06:58, Paul Foxworthy a écrit :
Hi Jacques,
These fields and methods will have package scope, but your description
suggests you intended protected. I'm really uncomfortable about fields
with
package scope. Is it really necessary? Could they be protected?
In the case of ignoreAttrs, the array should remain private. The loop
in jsonResponseFromRequestAttributes that uses the array should be
made a
method in its own right, with a name such as removeSensitiveAttributes.
That method could have higher visibility such as protected. The general
principle is "don't ask for data, ask for help" (
https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TellDontAsk.html).
Cheers
Paul Foxworthy
On 3 September 2017 at 04:45, Jacques Le Roux <
[email protected]>
wrote:
I think Wai asked for that because he needs it for a custom project.
It's
sill reasonably encapsulated.
You can revert if you want
Jacques
Le 02/09/2017 à 20:06, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
Do we have any derived classes that require exposing these interfaces?
I think it's not a good design to break encapsulation just because of
things we "might" need.
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:25 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Author: jleroux
Date: Sat Sep 2 12:25:13 2017
New Revision: 1807045
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1807045&view=rev
Log:
Improved: CommonEvents improvements
(OFBIZ-9673)
Replaces private to protected so that CommonEvents.java is more
usable
to
derived classes.
Thanks: Wai
Modified:
ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/framework/common/src/main/java/
org/apache/ofbiz/common/CommonEvents.java
Modified: ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/fr
amework/common/src/main/java/
org/apache/ofbiz/common/CommonEvents.java
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/fra
mework/common/src/main/java/org/apache/ofbiz/common/Common
Events.java?rev=1807045&r1=1807044&r2=1807045&view=diff
============================================================
==================
--- ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/framework/common/src/main/java/
org/apache/ofbiz/common/CommonEvents.java (original)
+++ ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/framework/common/src/main/java/
org/apache/ofbiz/common/CommonEvents.java Sat Sep 2 12:25:13 2017
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ public class CommonEvents {
public static final String module =
CommonEvents.class.getName();
- private static final String[] ignoreAttrs = new String[] { //
Attributes removed for security reason; _ERROR_MESSAGE_ is kept
+ static final String[] ignoreAttrs = new String[] { // Attributes
removed for security reason; _ERROR_MESSAGE_ is kept
"javax.servlet.request.key_size",
"_CONTEXT_ROOT_",
"_FORWARDED_FROM_SERVLET_",
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ public class CommonEvents {
"thisRequestUri"
};
- private static final UtilCache<String, Map<String, String>>
appletSessions = UtilCache.createUtilCache("AppletSessions", 0,
600000,
true);
+ static final UtilCache<String, Map<String, String>>
appletSessions
= UtilCache.createUtilCache("AppletSessions", 0, 600000, true);
public static String checkAppletRequest(HttpServletRequest
request, HttpServletResponse response) {
Delegator delegator = (Delegator)
request.getAttribute("delegator");
@@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ public class CommonEvents {
return "success";
}
- private static void writeJSONtoResponse(JSON json,
HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) throws
UnsupportedEncodingException {
+ static void writeJSONtoResponse(JSON json, HttpServletRequest
request, HttpServletResponse response) throws
UnsupportedEncodingException {
String jsonStr = json.toString();
if (jsonStr == null) {
Debug.logError("JSON Object was empty; fatal error!",
module);
