EarthChen commented on PR #16438: URL: https://github.com/apache/dubbo/pull/16438#issuecomment-6095764274
> @EarthChen— 您有空的时候能看一下这个吗？它已经开放六周了，但一直没有经过首次审核，而且状态始终保持良好：32/32 项检查全部通过，补丁覆盖率 100%，并且与当前`3.3`针尖没有任何冲突。 > > 此更改添加了`dubbo.application.reference-bean-naming-strategy`，其默认值为，因此除非选择启用，`field-name`否则现有行为是字节相同的—— #12637中按名称冲突的修复从构造上来说是非破坏性的。`interface-name``@Resource`[](https://github.com/apache/dubbo/issues/12637) > > 如果调整范围或将其拆分以便于审查，我很乐意这样做。 Thank you so much for putting together such a detailed analysis, reproduction demo, and test cases—really appreciate the effort! 👍 After thinking about it carefully, I am going to pass on merging this PR. To be honest, having a local bean and a Dubbo proxy accidentally collide on the exact same name (demo1Service) in the same application context feels like a naming conflict in the code itself. Dubbo defaults to using the field name for convenience, but adding a brand-new global configuration just to accommodate overlapping field names feels like using a configuration workaround to cover up a code smell. If someone runs into this kind of naming overlap, the cleaner way to handle it is to explicitly specify an id (like @DubboReference(id = "demo2Service")) or just clean up the field naming to keep the namespaces separate. That keeps the application architecture much healthier. Even though I won't be merging this PR, I'm super grateful for the deep dive and the discussion you opened up—it's definitely a helpful reference for others avoiding similar pitfalls. Thanks again for contributing! -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
