bbeaudreault commented on pull request #3663: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3663#issuecomment-915444266
@ndimiduk I hear you, but honestly I feel like there are pros and cons on both sides of that. If I break it out, I'd need to make BalanceResponse's constructor package-private at least, and the `org.apache.hadoop.hbase.client` package is quite large. I'd probably also get rid of the convenience `BalanceResponse.newBuilder()` since putting that in BalanceResponseBuilder would be sort of redundant. So we'd change the access pattern to `new BalanceResponseBuilder().build()`. Not a huge deal, but it's less intuitive and now there's an asymmetry with BalanceRequest. I could do the same with BalanceRequest, but that's just expanding non-intuitiveness. I could leave the asymmetry, but I do think there's some value there and I feel like inner Builder classes are sort of conventional. None of that is a non-starter, but I'm not sure if it's explicitly better than having the inner class be IA.Private, or even IA.Public. I can do it if you feel strongly about it, but just wanted to put that out there for consideration. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
