Hi,

interesting bug you spotted :-)

@Anatole: does the configJSR say anything about an order?

To my mind keeping the order (FIFO) seems logically but I wouldn't want
to break compatibility with the coming JSR ....

Apart from that: +1 since it's more natural and maybe we should enhance
the javadoc as well to make it more clear for consumers.

Just my 2ct
Phil

Am 01.02.2018 um 21:23 schrieb peculater:
> GitHub user peculater opened a pull request:
> 
>     https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/pull/11
> 
>     TAMAYA-327: Consistent signature creating ConversionContexts
> 
>     Comments in ConversionContext lead me to believe that supportedFormats
>     should have their order maintained after import.  The HashSet that the
>     Builder object uses as a backer will not accomplish that goal.  This
>     change converts the Builder to use ArrayLists for supportedFormats, like
>     the object proper.
>     
>     Some additional tests have been added here in pursuit of TAMAYA-288's
>     additional code coverage.
> 
> You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
> 
>     $ git pull https://github.com/peculater/incubator-tamaya TAMAYA-327
> 
> Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
> 
>     https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/pull/11.patch
> 
> To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
> with (at least) the following in the commit message:
> 
>     This closes #11
>     
> ----
> commit f63ba99ffaf4050827fc0ad88cd5df91f506956d
> Author: William Lieurance <william.lieurance@...>
> Date:   2018-02-01T20:16:27Z
> 
>     TAMAYA-327: Consistent signature creating ConversionContexts
>     
>     Comments in ConversionContext lead me to believe that supportedFormats
>     should have their order maintained after import.  The HashSet that the
>     Builder object uses as a backer will not accomplish that goal.  This
>     change converts the Builder to use ArrayLists for supportedFormats, like
>     the object proper.
>     
>     Some additional tests have been added here in pursuit of TAMAYA-288's
>     additional code coverage.
> 
> ----
> 
> 
> ---
> 

Reply via email to