If Matt wants to replace the factory methods with builders I am ok with that. I have no interest in doing the work myself.
I am hoping to start the release process for 2.4 tomorrow. I see no blockers. Ralph > On Sep 12, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > So here we are WRT programmatic configuration, users' options are: > > - The new builder API. Most flexible, not 100% type-safe, a typo in a > property name can mess you up. > - The sprinkling of Builder classes. Easy to code against (fluent), > type-safe, a bit brittle but less so than factory methods (order of calls > does not patter like method param order does). > - The factory methods. Most difficult to code against (long param list), most > brittle. > > My questions: > > - Should we remove Builder classes? > - Should we replace factory methods with Builder classes? Seems like a lot of > work. > - Should we accept/encourage contributors to submit Builder patches? > > Right now, I kind of want 2.4 out ASAP and see what people use. > > Thoughts? > > Gary > > > -- > E-Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/> > Home: http://garygregory.com/ <http://garygregory.com/> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>
