[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-598?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Oliver Heger resolved CONFIGURATION-598.
----------------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
You are completely right, the {{ConfigurationBuilder}} interface in the base
package is legacy and should have been removed. This is now fixed in SVN in
revision 1672747.
Many thanks for spotting this!
> There are 2 different ConfigurationBuilder interfaces
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CONFIGURATION-598
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-598
> Project: Commons Configuration
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0-alpha1
> Reporter: Bjarne Boström
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.0
>
>
> (This is my first time entering a bug here; at least searching with
> ConfigurationBuilder here did not bring any relevant issues so I wanted to
> post this)
> There are 2 different ConfigurationBuilder interfaces:
> one is {{org.apache.commons.configuration2.ConfigurationBuilder}} and other is
> {{org.apache.commons.configuration2.builder.ConfigurationBuilder}}
> The base package has
> {code}
> Configuration getConfiguration()
> {code}
> while the builder package has
> {code}
> T getConfiguration()
> {code}
> and the (<T extends Configuration> as generic parameter in the interface)
> I assume this is a bug, since nothing implements the base package one and all
> ConfigurationBuilder implementations implement the one in the builder
> subpackage. It is at least confusing in case the base package one is intended
> just for clients to implement. Also documentation points to the builder
> package one.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
