I'm pretty sure we can change that before applying the patch but in any case I would not go over the trouble to re-attach everything. If you are voted in you can communicate with Emil and apply the patches.
Best Regards, Wim On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Dirk Fauth <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed that all of my patches are invalid. I forgot to modify the > author and committer values, so they point to another account. :( > > I corrected my local commits via filter-branch and they seem to be fine > now. As there is no feedback from Emil yet and the vote for making me a > committer for Nebula is in progress, one question. Should I recreate all > patches and attach them to the tickets or should I wait if I become a > committer and then just push my local commits? > > Greez, > Dirk > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Dirk Fauth <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I changed the implementation like you suggested and contributed the >> corresponding patch. >> >> Thanks for the feedback Wim! :) >> >> Greez, >> Dirk >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Dirk Fauth <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Didn't want to blame you for the naming. By the time you implemented it, >>> it was ok. :-) >>> >>> Your suggestion sounds like a plan. I will modify it this way and >>> contribute. >>> >>> Thanks for the reply! >>> Am 27.07.2013 12:54 schrieb "Wim Jongman" <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Hi Wim, >>>> >>>>> I renamed your method because of the meaning of the method. My >>>>> getCommands() is the getter for the commands while your getCommands() do >>>>> some additional processing in flattening the commands. So in terms of API >>>>> design it is the better choice. But of course I can change that. Any >>>>> suggestions for another name to the real getter? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I totally agree that your naming is correct and that my naming is >>>> wrong. However, we cannot change the contract of an API method. >>>> >>>> I suggest you do the following: >>>> >>>> 1. Copy your getCommands to getCommandList() >>>> 2. Change the getCommands method as a delegate to getFlattenedCommands >>>> 3. Mark the getCommands as deprecated and explain the deprecation in >>>> the javadoc >>>> >>>> This way it is clear that the getCommands method is not correct, the >>>> user can see from the javadoc which method to call and we do not break the >>>> contract. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Wim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> nebula-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev >>>> >>>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > nebula-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev > >
_______________________________________________ nebula-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
